Skip to comments.Gay Profs at Notre Dame Speak Out About “Invisible Discrimination.”
Posted on 05/02/2012 8:35:09 AM PDT by marshmallow
click here to read article
“Completely unprofessional and utterly distasteful. The students have no need to be confronted with their instructor’s sexual preferences. “
You know that is so true! Never mind that this is a CATHOLIC university but I don’t care what the professor has sex with you are correct the professor does not need to tell me! I have never known a heterosexual professor come in on the first day and say “I am a strait professor” so why do these people feel the need to tell me what they have sexual relations with? Yuck! I don’t need to know.
For the same reason Sandra Fluke went to Georgetown:
TO DISRUPT THE SCHOOL!
These people just cannot live and let live — they have to follow the Alinsky/Cloward Piven model: disrupt and overwhelm whatever society they place themselves in.
And, they INTENTIONALLY place themselves to do the most harm to civil society.
Oneday, perhaps, we’ll take positive action to shut the disruptors up — until we grow a set of testicles and gain the courage to face them down, expect to see more and more of this type of “anti polite society” disruption.
PS One wonders why they have not been fired?
After all, the last time I checked, homosexuality was against Catholic doctrine.
Judging by her picture posted above, she wouldn't actually have to say a thing.
OMG, That is Sam Kinison!
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Too bad he is dead. It would make a pretty funny parody having him play a militantly anti-Cathlic lesbian professor at a Catholic university.
Three homosexual professors at the University of Notre Dame are reportedly saying the Catholic university isnt doing enough to be inclusive to the LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) community. Recently, the University announced it would not add sexual orientation to its nondiscrimination clause despite pressure from some student groups and faculty.
One would think such learned professors who were not born with teaching positions at Notre Dame, but rather, CHOSE employment there, would at least attempt to do some research regarding just who they chose to work for.
Additionally, one would think that choosing an employer would at least require as much consideration as choosing a sex partner or choosing what sexual activity to engage in would -regardless, the fallacy of any "born that way" arguments?
What these homosexually disordered academics falsely claim as "Invisible Discrimination" is actually "Legitimate Discrimination" and comprises but a portion of a very publicly proclaimed and published body of Catholic teaching on the subject of those dealing with those who suffer from the homosexual disorder.
Yes Professors, there is discrimination -legitimate discrimination (Read #11 below and take note that it is not invisible)! The Catholic Church teaches it plainly (it is visible to ALL except those who choose to be blinded by an attraction to intrinsically disordered sexual activity):
10. "Sexual orientation" does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder (cf. "Letter," No. 3) and evokes moral concern.
11. There are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account, for example, in the placement of children for adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or athletic coaches, and in military recruitment.
13. Including "homosexual orientation" among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices. This is all the more deleterious since there is no right to homosexuality (cf. No. 10) which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims. The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality. A person's homosexuality would be invoked in opposition to alleged discrimination, and thus the exercise of rights would be defended precisely via the affirmation of the homosexual condition instead of in terms of a violation of basic human rights.
And the NAACP doesn't have enough white supremacists on its board of directors. I guess everyone's going to have to work on their inclusiveness.