Catholic Teacher Fired

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]nocturnus wrote:
Aaaahhh, the Catholic Church - where birth control and IVF make you a ‘grave, immoral sinner’ but abusing kids and covering it up is acceptable.

Strange set of rules.[/quote]

You got that right.
[/quote]

Don’t worry, your record is safe. Atheists have murdered over 300 million in the 20th century alone. Nobody is going to beat that record anytime soon. And according to nocturnus, if a few people belonging to a group do a bad thing, it is automatically acceptable by that group. Ergo, in that model, atheists murdering non-atheists is acceptable to atheists. Just like abusing kids is acceptable to Catholics. [/quote]

Ah yes, the old meme of “atheists killing in the name of no god”. LOL…yea

Glad you dragged this out, I’ll have a chance to address it later.[/quote]

Go nuts.[/quote]

You already admitted in a previous thread that you also use secular human reasoning. In your own words, you said “Of course, no shirt no shoes isn’t in the Bible”
[/quote]
Admitted? That’s nothing I admitted and I don’t use ‘secular human reasoning’. I used either deductive or inductive reasoning for most of it. I simply said, I don’t need to use the bible to make my points. I don’t and haven’t.

Talking bible with atheists is like an illiterate joining a book club.

I never said the above quote, you got me confused with somebody else.

[quote]
So you know linking the morality of a few crazy atheists to all atheists is silly yet you persist.[/quote]

Sure, but you guys do it all the time to us. It happened right here in this thread, because a few priests abused children and and few others covered it up, we’re somehow a-ok with child abuse? I am just returning the favor, if we’re ok with child molestation because a few crazy terrible priests did it, then by the same token you must be in favor of mass murder because a few terrible atheists did it. It works both ways.

Besides I have good documentation to back it up. I am sure I am going to get a bunch of links to ‘rah-rah’ atheist propaganda. “Hey look at us, we’re not so bad! It’s really you guys, you’re the bad ones!”

You may be able to claim your not a religion, but you cannot claim your not a group.

62

[quote]pat wrote:

You are fucked up with stereotypes, damn. Of course, we follow secular morals, No shoes, no shirt, no service ain’t in the bible.[/quote]

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/addressing_misconceptions_of_christianity_on_pwi;jsessionid=51FFF40D3CFE82124203053998CFF1B8-mcd02.hydra?id=5097976&pageNo=2

I accidentally bumped the old thread, meant to post it here.

63

secular morals are derived from human reasoning.

64

[quote]pat wrote:

Sure, but you guys do it all the time to us. It happened right here in this thread, because a few priests abused children and and few others covered it up, we’re somehow a-ok with child abuse? I am just returning the favor, if we’re ok with child molestation because a few crazy terrible priests did it, then by the same token you must be in favor of mass murder because a few terrible atheists did it. It works both ways.

Besides I have good documentation to back it up. I am sure I am going to get a bunch of links to ‘rah-rah’ atheist propaganda. “Hey look at us, we’re not so bad! It’s really you guys, you’re the bad ones!”

You may be able to claim your not a religion, but you cannot claim your not a group. [/quote]

While I don’t agree that Catholics are ‘okay’ with covering up child abuse, I will say certain bad acts can be attributed to a person’s religion. When someone commits a heinous act because they think their religion is telling them to do so, that should be tied to x religion.

65

[quote]therajraj wrote:
secular morals are derived from human faith.[/quote]

Fixed that for you.

66

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

Does the fact that her boss gave his blessings before she proceeded matter at all to you guys? Don’t you think it’s a little ridiculous for your boss to give you the okay on an action and still get fired for it?[/quote]

No. She still has to be fired.
[/quote]

Cold and unflinching.

If I ever need a hitman I’ll know who to PM ;)[/quote]

There is a difference between not being controlled by passions and being a psychopath.

67

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The whole point is to have children. Who thinks up this insanity?

Anyone who thinks that this woman was immoral because she wanted to have a family is totally insane.[/quote]

Straw man. That’s not why it’s immoral, HH.

68

[quote]therajraj wrote:
secular morals are derived from human reasoning.[/quote]

lol

69

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Sure, but you guys do it all the time to us. It happened right here in this thread, because a few priests abused children and and few others covered it up, we’re somehow a-ok with child abuse? I am just returning the favor, if we’re ok with child molestation because a few crazy terrible priests did it, then by the same token you must be in favor of mass murder because a few terrible atheists did it. It works both ways.

Besides I have good documentation to back it up. I am sure I am going to get a bunch of links to ‘rah-rah’ atheist propaganda. “Hey look at us, we’re not so bad! It’s really you guys, you’re the bad ones!”

You may be able to claim your not a religion, but you cannot claim your not a group. [/quote]

While I don’t agree that Catholics are ‘okay’ with covering up child abuse, I will say certain bad acts can be attributed to a person’s religion. When someone commits a heinous act because they think their religion is telling them to do so, that should be tied to x religion. [/quote]

I would disagree on both counts. The former was an offense not only to the victims, but the damage it did to the church is pretty obvious too. Years later we are still bashed constantly about this as if we were complicit in the actions themselves even though in the large scheme of things, it was a really small number. While 1 is to many, it still in the greater context was a very small amount of people.
Where are as right now, today, child porn is rampant. Child prostitution is off the chain abuse of children is very high right now and nobody even notices. Why? Because it’s not Christians doing it. So why bat an eye, if you cannot bash a christian over it. Everybody is very outraged at the actions of a handful of people some 20 - 50 years ago. But nobody gives a shit about the here and now so long as religious people aren’t involved.

As to your second point, you cannot attack a religion based on the hearsay of some freaks. You can I guess but it would be misplaced. That is unless the religion is in fact instructing it’s followers to commit grievous acts, then it is culpable.
If the church instruction is to cause harm and do harm, then the church is culpable. If some nut takes matters into his own hands, but says the church or God made him do it, the church is not culpable.

70

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

You are fucked up with stereotypes, damn. Of course, we follow secular morals, No shoes, no shirt, no service ain’t in the bible.[/quote]

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/addressing_misconceptions_of_christianity_on_pwi;jsessionid=51FFF40D3CFE82124203053998CFF1B8-mcd02.hydra?id=5097976&pageNo=2

I accidentally bumped the old thread, meant to post it here. [/quote]

Ahhh, I did say the quote(I really didn’t remember that), but the implication is out of context. What I was talking about there, is that the fact that societal morals exist, it doesn’t mean that absolute ones don’t. I was affirming that, of course, we do live by secular morals as prescribed by society as well as the ultimate basis for the existence of morality which is a higher metaphysical form.

71

Folks, if you don’t like religious based institutions actually being able to resemble their belief system, just say it. It’s our school. It’s our donations. It’s our volunteerism, planning, and structure. It’s our community monitoring them. Our clergy, our parents, our parishioners. Our values. Our initiative. Send your kid somewhere else, please. Take a job somewhere else, please. This isn’t the public’s institution. This is our institution.

72

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Folks, if you don’t like religious based institutions actually being able to resemble their belief system, just say it. It’s our school. It’s our donations. It’s our volunteerism, planning, and structure. It’s our community monitoring them. Our clergy, our parents, our parishioners. Our values. Our initiative. Send your kid somewhere else, please. Take a job somewhere else, please. This isn’t the public’s institution. This is our institution.[/quote]

This is not about the students and what they are taught or parents trying to change what Catholic schools teach. This about the Catholic school and their decision to hire people who are not members of the church, have no background with or knowledge of the church, and then arbitrarily telling someone that she cannot work there for not following some moral, despite the fact that plenty of other teachers were violating Catholic morals, that she was never told was wrong, and the head of the school did not even know it was wrong according to the Church. In this country, there are laws that protect individuals from that kind of discrimination by an employer and there are very good reasons for those laws. There are also laws governing education in America, and there are good reasons for those too. If the Catholic church does not want to abide by those laws, then don’t operate schools in this country. Religious freedom only goes so far. It is not a free ticket for any church to do whatever it wants to whomever they want for whatever reason they want. If you want non-Catholics to leave the school alone, then do not hire non-Catholics and expect them to know and follow all your rules, especially if you do not tell them about or otherwise educate them about those rules.

73

If you’re going to fire someone, fire the person who gave her the go ahead to get IVF

74

Firing someone who was open, honest and acted in good faith is ridiculous.

75

Here HH we disagree! IVF requires multiple lives be created and when they do not implant in the uterine wall they die. The lives of children start at the moment the eggs and sperm are joined in a petri dish, special and unique lives are created every time this happens. The embryos that don’t attach are destroyed by default. Therefore when undergoing IVF multiple times, you create life and then kill the lives that do NOT attach.

Simple question though to the family that wants kids. Except there ARE options! gasp Dramatic intake of breath . . . . adoption.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The whole point is to have children. Who thinks up this insanity?

Anyone who thinks that this woman was immoral because she wanted to have a family is totally insane.[/quote]

76

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
If you want non-Catholics to leave the school alone, then do not hire non-Catholics and expect them to know and follow all your rules, especially if you do not tell them about or otherwise educate them about those rules. [/quote]

No sir, if she wants to go through RCIA that’s her decision. Just saying she’s expected to conduct herself in a way conducive to the Catholic mission of the institution is above and beyond. Stop trying to tell others they can’t be hired under OUR rules. Do you think you’re their parents?

77

[quote]therajraj wrote:
If you’re going to fire someone, fire the person who gave her the go ahead to get IVF[/quote]

If OUR institution does, it will be because we decided to.

78

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Firing someone who was open, honest and acted in good faith is ridiculous.[/quote]

Great, I won’t bump into you at the next Catholic school fundraising event. Whatever will I do.

79

A newly fertilized egg is a ball of cells. It remains that way for some time. They also get spat out, with some regularity without ever getting past the ‘ball of cells’ stage. You might claim that some constitute a life, as they potentially are, but you cannot claim that for them all as if it is a matter of fact.

80

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
If you want non-Catholics to leave the school alone, then do not hire non-Catholics and expect them to know and follow all your rules, especially if you do not tell them about or otherwise educate them about those rules. [/quote]

No sir, if she wants to go through RCIA that’s her decision. Just saying she’s expected to conduct herself in a way conducive to the Catholic mission of the institution is above and beyond. Stop trying to tell others they can’t be hired under OUR rules. Do you think your their parents?
[/quote]

I am saying that if the Catholic church wants to HIRE EMPLOYEES in the UNITED STATES that are citizens of the United States, especially if those employees are not themselves clergy members of the Catholic church, then they are required to abide by the laws of the United States in regards to how they treat and hire their employees and how that business is run (i.e. discrimination laws). The US constitution requires that the US government cannot interfere with your right to practice your religion, that is it. It does not give the Catholic church or any other church the right to set up a business in the United States and hire United States citizens as employees of that business and treat those United States citizens however the hell it wants. Any entity that operates a business in the United States is required to abide by the laws regulating business practices, including ways in which you can not discriminate against employees. If any Church or other entity, including yours, does not want to abide by those laws, then find some other place to run your businesses.