Same-sex marriage grounds for firing Catholic school’s guidance counselor, appeals court says

[Belk]

You’re missing the point. For instance should a Christian school be required to hire an atheist? Or what if a Catholic school fired a teacher for living with someone without being married?
These people knew what was expected of them when they took the job.
Some people believe that practicing homosexuals are acting contrary to their religious beliefs and no matter how bad you want to change that they have a right to disagree with you.

Yet when people disagree with the actions of the Catholics and express it in this thread you label it "Hate" and say it is inappropriate. So which is it? Is it OK to expect people to conform to your morality or not? Because if it is OK then there should be no issue with the umbrage people feel towards the Catholics.

The pro LGBTQ crowd wants to take away the right to disagree with them.

No, I do not.

They have invented words for people who disagree and the very reason they would want to work at a Catholic school is to try to impose their lifestyle on people who disagree

OH? That is the only possible reason? No others exist?

 

[BPPLEE]

Yet when people disagree with the actions of the Catholics and express it in this thread you label it "Hate" and say it is inappropriate. So which is it? Is it OK to expect people to conform to your morality or not? Because if it is OK then there should be no issue with the umbrage people feel towards the Catholics.

No, I do not.

OH? That is the only possible reason? No others exist?

I don’t have a word for people who hate Catholics. What kind of phobe are they?
There are more things than I can list that I disagree with the Catholic Church about but having the freedom to choose who works at their schools is not one of them.

 

[stevil]

At least in America we still have separation of church and state so totalitarians have to put up or shut up.

In NZ we have much better separation of church and state. We aren't constantly under attack by politicians trying to inject their religious beliefs into law.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I don't know about this particular case. It seems the plaintiff bragged of having gone regularly to mass, but it's not clear whether she took Communion. And I haven't seen her religion discussed directly.

However, in a previous SCOTUS ruling (that largely guided this decision I expect)...

"The Court reaches this result even though the teachers taught primarily secular subjects, lacked substantial religious titles and training, and were not even required to be Catholic," Sotomayor wrote in an opinion that was joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

More infestation of the Roberts doctrine of religion not just being a more privileged set of beliefs and practices, but of the religious rights of X being superior to the non-religious rights of Y.

I think J. Sotomayor has a solid point, even if it is from the dissenting opinion. If they don't even bother requiring teachers and guidance counselors to be Catholic how can they be in a (religious) minisiterial role. It defies logic, even Catholic logic. The Catholic church does have lay ministerial roles (like the Eucharistic ministers that hand out communion), but you can be sure that they are all Catholics in good standing. The same would be true of religious education instructors. Your not going to find a Lutheran at the front of a class of 1st graders (or is it 2nd graders, I forget) preparing them for First Communion. This is one where the RCC's own particularity about restricting things to Catholics only (again on communion, only members of a very select set of churches approved by Papal authorities are allowed to take communion at Mass) should bite them.

 

[Valletta]

I really think it stretches the law to assert that the 'ministerial exception' applies to guidance counselors or any other lay staff of a school.

The "ministerial exception" is not law. People have the right to freely practice their religion. That means that they can have contracts in regard to their employees upholding their religion. What if the guidance counselor was really a Satanist who pretended to be a Catholic? People pay money to have their children attend schools that teach Catholicism.

 

[Valletta]

More infestation of the Roberts doctrine of religion not just being a more privileged set of beliefs and practices, but of the religious rights of X being superior to the non-religious rights of Y.

I think J. Sotomayor has a solid point, even if it is from the dissenting opinion. If they don't even bother requiring teachers and guidance counselors to be Catholic how can they be in a (religious) minisiterial role. It defies logic, even Catholic logic. The Catholic church does have lay ministerial roles (like the Eucharistic ministers that hand out communion), but you can be sure that they are all Catholics in good standing. The same would be true of religious education instructors. Your not going to find a Lutheran at the front of a class of 1st graders (or is it 2nd graders, I forget) preparing them for First Communion. This is one where the RCC's own particularity about restricting things to Catholics only (again on communion, only members of a very select set of churches approved by Papal authorities are allowed to take communion at Mass) should bite them.

Your efforts to finds something that should "bite" Catholics seem far flung. Even sports teams have conduct clauses and a Catholic school has added Constitutional protection of the freedom to practice their religion. Catholic school contracts do not allow specific behavior for employees, one is co-habitatiion outside of marriage. It doesn't matter whether the employees are Catholic or not. In order to obtain employment a people much agree and sign their names as a pledge.

 

[stevil]

Your efforts to finds something that should "bite" Catholics seem far flung. Even sports teams have conduct clauses and a Catholic school has added Constitutional protection of the freedom to practice their religion. Catholic school contracts do not allow specific behavior for employees, one is co-habitatiion outside of marriage. It doesn't matter whether the employees are Catholic or not. In order to obtain employment a people much agree and sign their names as a pledge.

Proper schools don't pry into the lives of their employees, their teachers.
Proper businesses don't pry into the lives of their employees.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Of course the priest transfer issue is wrong. Not relevant here; entirely separate issue.

No, it's not a separate issue. 2 different sins. One gets fired for being gay. The priest punishment for rape, is getting sent to another church. We're he can rape and ruin more peoples lives. As for the Gay person getting fired. That's a church issue. The person fired should work in a non- religious work place.

 

[BPPLEE]

Proper schools don't pry into the lives of their employees, their teachers.
Proper businesses don't pry into the lives of their employees.

This is not hard to understand. It’s a Catholic school.

 

[Belk]

I don’t have a word for people who hate Catholics. What kind of phobe are they?

Why is having a word an issue? Do you castigate Jews because they have a word for the specific bigotry they experience?

There are more things than I can list that I disagree with the Catholic Church about but having the freedom to choose who works at their schools is not one of them.

So which is it? Should I be allowed to discriminate against Catholics like they do against homosexuals or should it be forbidden? I just want the standard to be applied consistently across the groups.

 

[HARK!]

Proper schools don't pry into the lives of their employees, their teachers.
Proper businesses don't pry into the lives of their employees.

The No True Scotsman fallacy?

Really?

This is pure rubbish. Many proper business do background checks, and even invasive drug testing on their employees. Many also require submission to polygraphs.

Marriage certificates are a matter of public record.

Any school that doesn't do background checks on those who will be alone with children, don't deserve to be trusted with children.

It's wise for employees to keep their private matters private; but marriage is not a private matter.

 

[Lukaris]

I think some people want to transform religious institutions that are considered “hateful” by their own totalitarian outlook. This way the religious institution’s beliefs are undermined from within and cannot even be expressed because to do so would be “hateful”. I should say at least in America we still have separation of state and church.

I believe there are problems with injecting religious issues into secular law. The abortion issue is one; Roe v. Wade should have just remained in place. Leftist extremists actually started problems by expanding abortion from Roe v Wade with partial birth abortions. That was beyond the pale but the basic secular law of abortion should have remained as it had from the Roe case.

Pro life should be the witness of all truly Christian Churches and part of the overall Gospel preaching ( pro life an aspect needing to be often emphasized). How far society can be transformed to the Gospel is unknown but must be the goal.

Probably a majority of present day secularists ( not all by any means!) are really tyrants. If, for ex., a Catholic institution fired a vocal, pro abortionist ( who previously concealed their convictions) the tyrant variety of secularist would cry foul and term the action as “hatred.”

 

[HARK!]

Probably a majority of present day secularists ( not all by any means!) are really tyrants. If, for ex., a Catholic institution fired a vocal, pro abortionist ( who previously concealed their convictions) the tyrant variety of secularist would cry foul and term the action as “hatred.”

The hypocrisy of some is astounding as they preach tolerance, while at the same time attacking anyone who stands in the way of their agendas.

Where is their tolerance for the safety of children in their mothers' wombs?

 

[Valletta]

Proper schools don't pry into the lives of their employees, their teachers.
Proper businesses don't pry into the lives of their employees.

It's a simple behavioral contract that is so common with all kinds of professions. Parents pay good money so that the schools teach the children the faith which includes no co-habitation without marriage. Unfortunately a small number of employees have lied and violated their contracts from the beginning.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I think some people want to transform religious institutions that are considered “hateful” by their own totalitarian outlook. This way the religious institution’s beliefs are undermined from within and cannot even be expressed because to do so would be “hateful”.

I'd like to see them fail because of what they are. Fortunately with the Catholic Church in this country it's an ongoing and long running process.

I should say at least in America we still have separation of state and church.

It ain't non-religious people trying to merge the two.

 

[BPPLEE]

Why is having a word an issue? Do you castigate Jews because they have a word for the specific bigotry they experience?

So which is it? Should I be allowed to discriminate against Catholics like they do against homosexuals or should it be forbidden? I just want the standard to be applied consistently across the groups.

If you have a religious conviction that prevents you from hiring a Catholic because it violates your beliefs you have my blessing in choosing not to hire a Catholic. They wouldn’t want to work for you anyway
I can’t speak for what a court would find though.

 

[BPPLEE]

It's a simple behavioral contract that is so common with all kinds of professions. Parents pay good money so that the schools teach the children the faith which includes no co-habitation without marriage. Unfortunately a small number of employees have lied and violated their contracts from the beginning.

Why would an openly gay man in a same sex marriage choose to work at a Catholic school?

 

[Lukaris]

I'd like to see them fail because of what they are. Fortunately with the Catholic Church in this country it's an ongoing and long running process.

It ain't non-religious people trying to merge the two.

More like undermine from within, legally restrict, & render irrelevant.

 

[HARK!]

If you have a religious conviction that prevents you from hiring a Catholic because it violates your beliefs you have my blessing in choosing not to hire a Catholic. They wouldn’t want to work for you anyway
I can’t speak for what a court would find though.

Maybe the Catholic Church should start a movement to flood Planned Parenthood with job applications. After they replace the current staff; they can encourage mothers to love their children, not murder them, every time.

 

[Hans Blaster]

More like undermine from within, legally restrict, & render irrelevant.

We don't want to have anything to do with the Pope's church.