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

[HARK!]

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

Who are "we?"

 

[BPPLEE]

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.

@Belk see above

 

[Hans Blaster]

Who are "we?"

Non-religious people. (Especially ex-catholics.)

 

[Lukaris]

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

I believe the goal is the secular over the religious in general. I don’t believe a majority of secularists consider a hope for a spontaneous irrelevance of religion satisfactory.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The "ministerial exception" is not law.

Au contraire, mon frere.

"The ministerial exception, sometimes known as the "ecclesiastical exception," is a legal doctrine in the United States"

What if the guidance counselor was really a Satanist who pretended to be a Catholic?

That wouldn't even be necessary for them to pretend. The ruling I mention above shows that Catholic schools can hire non-Catholics, and yet still regard them as 'ministers'.

Again, the only reason the school is allowed to do this is because the courts have now decided that teachers (and now guidance counselors) are 'ministers'. At least until it is tested, this school could not fire a gardener or accountant for being in a SSM.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I believe the goal is the secular over the religious in general. I don’t believe a majority of secularists consider a hope for a spontaneous irrelevance of religion satisfactory.

This is already a secular country and it always was. I never wanted anything to do with a Catholic school and still don't. I find the idea the "secularists" want to infiltrate your religious institutions to destroy them from with in to be rather odd. It seems like a waste of time to try to infiltrate such places.

 

[BPPLEE]

Non-religious people. (Especially ex-catholics.)

You speak for all non-religious people? That’s funny because I’m not religious.
Oh I’m a believer, that’s true, but I’m not religious

 

[HARK!]

Non-religious people. (Especially ex-catholics.)

So you're the spokesman for all of them?

 

[Hans Blaster]

You speak for all non-religious people?

Oh good grief.

That’s funny because I’m not religious.
Oh I’m a believer, that’s true, but I’m not religious

I'm not sure what the difference is.

So as a self-identified "non-religious person" do you have any desires to infiltrate Catholic churches or institutions to take them down? I don't.

 

[BPPLEE]

This is already a secular country and it always was. I never wanted anything to do with a Catholic school and still don't. I find the idea the "secularists" want to infiltrate your religious institutions to destroy them from with in to be rather odd. It seems like a waste of time to try to infiltrate such places.

I don’t know about secularists but some LGBTQ advocates won’t be satisfied until anyone who doesn’t embrace every aspect of their agenda is silenced.

 

[BPPLEE]

Oh good grief.

I'm not sure what the difference is.

So as a self-identified "non-religious person" do you have any desires to infiltrate Catholic churches or institutions to take them down? I don't.

No I don’t. I don’t mind it people disagree with me and I have no desire to force my beliefs on anyone else.

 

[HARK!]

Oh good grief.

That doesn't really answer the question.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I don’t know about secularists but some LGBTQ advocates won’t be satisfied until anyone who doesn’t embrace every aspect of their agenda is silenced.

I'd appreciate not being lumped in with activists. I am not one.

 

[Malleeboy]

Should political parties be able to discriminate about who they employ? (Democrats employ a far-right person, Republicans have to hire a Trotskyite?)
Should activists' groups have the right to discriminate? (Can David Duke be able to get a job at NAAPC or SPLC)

 

[BPPLEE]

I'd appreciate not being lumped in with activists. I am not one.

I said some. Not all

 

[HARK!]

SPLC

I was saving this one, for just the right response.

I was going to ask if they should be forced to employ Neo-Nazis.

You beat me to the punch.

 

[Belk]

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.

Why must it be a religious belief?

They wouldn’t want to work for you anyway

Maybe, maybe not. I'm a pretty fun guy.

I can’t speak for what a court would find though.

We will leave that for another discussion.

 

[Belk]

@Belk see above

They are free to do so. Last I checked it is illegal to base employment on religious affiliation.

 

[Hans Blaster]

That doesn't really answer the question.

So here on a web site where non-believers are repeatedly on the receiving end of generalizations from those who self-identify as Christians about what non-believers do I can't respond in the general to an unsupported generalization claiming that "secularists" want to infiltrate church institutions to bring them down from the inside? This is something I've never heard any non-believer claim to want to do. Perhaps if the poster I was responding to has a specific example they could share that, but instead I get other posters challenging my right to stand up for other like me as "not their spokesman".

 

[Belk]

I don’t know about secularists but some LGBTQ advocates won’t be satisfied until anyone who doesn’t embrace every aspect of their agenda is silenced.

Quote them please.