Should private religious school be forced to enroll student...

[strawman]

Should a private religious school be forced to enroll a student where the family is living in opposition to the school's teachings and beliefs?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/03/08/colorado.lesbians.church/index.html?hpt=T2

This reminds me of all the people who said that private churches would never be forced to marry gay people, and yet here we are. If this goes through, sounds like supporters of proposition 8 will have a lot more firepower in their arsenal saying that if such marriages are recognized then the churches will have to support such relationships, even if they are not allowed in their teachings.

Given that this is a private religious school, is it within their rights to permit only those students where the student and their family subscribe to the teachings and beliefs of the church?

 

[Cajungal]

Ugh. You've gone and gotten me started.

They might as well shut out people who lie, cheat, have violent tendencies, drink or eat in excess, put money and things before their spirituality, feel jealous of their friends and loved ones constantly....

That's the big issue I have: Homosexual relations are a sin in the eyes of the church.. ok. And they choose to hold that particular sin over all the other ones that their devout followers commit every day. It's very visible, so gay people don't even have a chance to show that they're just as capable of good morals.

As for, do they have the right? Well... and it hurts me to say this, but... I guess they do. They live by a certain set of standards which I and many others find archaic, but that's their business. I think it's an incredibly stupid and callous thing to do. If I had any kind of control there, that decision wouldn't be mine. Even when I was Catholic, I believed that, for all the "common" sinners that are allowed through church and public school doors, we shouldn't have any problem with the people who commit slightly different kinds of sins. (To be clear, I don't think homosexual relations are a sin. I hope that's clear by now). That priest said during a sermon that the decision wasn't about "excluding sinners" but that's just what they're doing. They can't catch every liar, they can't catch every cheat or every glutton, but they CAN easily spot and exclude gay people, and that's the only difference. All of those things mentioned are sins in their eyes. I mean, shit, so many Catholics--MOST Catholics I've encountered--don't support the church's views on birth control, but are they going to go to the trouble of weeding out those bastards who use condoms or the pill?

It's always made more sense to me to invite all people and let their business be their business. The "weeding out" is done by God later, so I've been told anyway. But so few people follow their own advice.

 

[strawman]

That priest said during a sermon that the decision wasn't about "excluding sinners" but that's just what they're doing. They can't catch every liar, they can't catch every cheat or every glutton, but they CAN easily spot and exclude gay people, and that's the only difference.

Well, that and the liar might tell the church that they confess their sin, and work to stop lying, whereas the gay people openly oppose the church's teaching. They don't confess their sin because they don't believe in it. Which is fine for them, but I think that those who are comparing their actions to the actions of others aren't taking in the whole situation.

But you are right - it is easier to see that that are openly living in opposition to the church's teachings. I imagine if they were able to hide it as well as couples that use birth control can hide their opposition, then the student would probably be accepted.

I don't know what the interview process is, though. If the interviewer asks, "Do you strive to live according to and believe in all the principles and ordinances of this church?" then it's at that point that the family must either truly be living them, or lie during the acceptance process. I've no doubt that this happens - but if the family is truthful, and gets rejected, then goes and complains about it publicly - they are essentially saying that the school does not have the right to ask that question, and base enrollment qualifications on it.

 

[phil]

"The issue is not about our not accepting 'sinners,' " he said. "It is not about punishing the child for the sins of his or her parents. It is simply that the lesbian couple is saying that their relationship is a good one that should be accepted by everyone; and the Church cannot agree to that."

It's not about punishing the child for what their parents do or believe....it's about punishing a child for what their parents do and believe.

 

[Cajungal]

Yeah... I know all that. It's why I said that they do have the right... grudgingly. A contract is a contract, even if it's stupid.

I talked to the fellow about it. He said that a lot of private schools, like the army, are kind of "don't ask, don't tell" about things like that, but if it comes out in public that someone is violating the agreement that comes with enrollment, they can't ignore it. It's still annoying to me... someone who knew for a fact how many hetero kids were having sex in closets at my Catholic school and got to stay. Hell, even the girl who got pregnant got to stay for her senior year. We all thought she'd be suspended.

Maybe that's why this shocks me so much. My private school was pretty cool about that kind of thing, probably because they were smart enough to accept tuition checks from wherever they could find them. But we had some Muslim and Jewish students enroll with no problem--they just had to behave according to the school rules, sit through weekly mass, and take theology classes.

Anyway, I'm getting away from the point. Just making a comment.

---------- Post added 03-09-2010 at 12:01 AM ---------- Previous post was 03-08-2010 at 11:57 PM ----------

"The issue is not about our not accepting 'sinners,' " he said. "It is not about punishing the child for the sins of his or her parents. It is simply that the lesbian couple is saying that their relationship is a good one that should be accepted by everyone; and the Church cannot agree to that."

It's not about punishing the child for what their parents do or believe....it's about punishing a child for what their parents do and believe.

Yyyyyyyyyyyyyup, I love that line.

 

[strawman]

"The issue is not about our not accepting 'sinners,' " he said. "It is not about punishing the child for the sins of his or her parents. It is simply that the lesbian couple is saying that their relationship is a good one that should be accepted by everyone; and the Church cannot agree to that."

It's not about punishing the child for what their parents do or believe....it's about punishing a child for what their parents do and believe.

Actually, he's saying, "It's about what the parents say in opposition to the church." A lot of churches allow members who are known to live outside the principles of the church. However, when those people start publicly saying that the church is wrong, and essentially preaching against some of the church's beliefs, then the church might feel that a line has been crossed - it's no longer about making personally "wrong" choices - it is about preaching and teaching others.

Besides, the real punishment for the child, IMHO, would be sending them to a school that daily teaches them that their parents are vile sinners, and they must reject their parents if they are to receive their heavenly inheritance.

As far as I can tell, the parents aren't doing this for their child, and if somehow the student is accepted I only see trouble on the horizon when the parents decide that their student should be given alternatives to the school's religious teaching concerning marriage and family relationships.

 

[phil]

It doesn't look like they are speaking out against the catholic church though, unless being gay is speaking out against it.

You do have a point though, in that it's for the best that he or she probably not attend a bigoted institution anyway. Really everything about this just pisses me off.

 

[Troll]

Since the school is private and does not receive government funds, they have the right to reject the student. And organizations have a right to protest them for doing so, and critics can rip them a new one all they want.

This has nothing to do with Prop 8. or people foolishly worried that the government recognizing gay marriage will force religious institutions to recognize them as well. This is just a religious group fighting with private citizens.

 

[@Li3n]

Punishing a kid because of his parents is stupid. They'd never even consider it if the parents where unrepentant murderers or something...

That's the big issue I have: Homosexual relations are a sin in the eyes of the church.. ok. And they choose to hold that particular sin over all the other ones that their devout followers commit every day. It's very visible, so gay people don't even have a chance to show that they're just as capable of good morals.

As for, do they have the right? Well... and it hurts me to say this, but... I guess they do. They live by a certain set of standards which I and many others find archaic, but that's their business. I think it's an incredibly stupid and callous thing to do. If I had any kind of control there, that decision wouldn't be mine. Even when I was Catholic, I believed that, for all the "common" sinners that are allowed through church and public school doors, we shouldn't have any problem with the people who commit slightly different kinds of sins. (To be clear, I don't think homosexual relations are a sin. I hope that's clear by now). That priest said during a sermon that the decision wasn't about "excluding sinners" but that's just what they're doing. They can't catch every liar, they can't catch every cheat or every glutton, but they CAN easily spot and exclude gay people, and that's the only difference. All of those things mentioned are sins in their eyes. I mean, shit, so many Catholics--MOST Catholics I've encountered--don't support the church's views on birth control, but are they going to go to the trouble of weeding out those bastards who use condoms or the pill?

It's always made more sense to me to invite all people and let their business be their business. The "weeding out" is done by God later, so I've been told anyway. But so few people follow their own advice.

Sorry, but that doesn't apply to marrying gay people... that would be more like condoning all those sins you mentioned.

But yeah, love thy neighbour, he without sin and all that...

 

[tegid]

So can I open a school that only admits white people or children from non mixed race marriages if I think black people shouldn't have children?
Or the murderers thing @lien said...

 

[Cog]

People can't change his race. Religion is a choice, why you would like to enroll your child in a religious school if you do not like such religion?

 

[tegid]

Because they have good teaching standards, for instance.

 

[sixpackshaker]

A friend of mine had a son kicked out of a church run school because the child was singing the Rob Zombie song he heard in the car, while he was walking into class.

Private institutions can make most any decision that they like, no matter how wrong they are.

 

[Bowielee]

People can't change his race. Religion is a choice, why you would like to enroll your child in a religious school if you do not like such religion?

Because, of course, gay people are all godless sinners. One could never possibly believe that they believe in a religion. :eyeroll:

 

[Cog]

It's not about sinners. I don't care about that. It's about beliefs. If the KKK had the best school in the whole world, would you like your children to go there?

 

[Bowielee]

It's not about sinners. I don't care about that. It's about beliefs. If the KKK had the best school in the whole world, would you like your children to go there?

My point went right over your head. Don't you think it's possible that the parents of the child are religious people, and that's why they wanted to send their child to a religious school?

Not all gay people are atheists, y'know.

 

[Cog]

They are religious people who are against the beliefs of the religion they belong?

 

[Bowielee]

Yes, that is entirely possible. I know many gay catholics. They may not believe in that part of the churches teachings, but it doesn't change their belief structure as a whole. Nothing annoys me more that when people assume absolutes.

 

[Cog]

Maybe you are right about the schools. But I'm curious. Why gay catholics keeps calling themselves catholics? They are christians and christians come in a big variety of flavors. It's not like they can't be against another set of beliefs and keep the same god.

 

[tegid]

Almost every catholic will disagree with some point or another of what the catholic church or the pope defend.

 

[Cog]

That is why I stopped calling myself a catholic. Now I am "technically christian"

 

[Dei]

Basically what I learned after being a Catholic from birth was that "Every Catholic is a bad Catholic." I don't really follow Catholicism anymore, because quite frankly, they are so out of touch with the world that it makes me sick. (It also helps that I no longer live in Buffalo which is Catholic central even though no one really understands how terrible they are at following what the Catholic Church believes.)

 

[Chazwozel]

Should a private religious school be forced to enroll a student where the family is living in opposition to the school's teachings and beliefs?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/03/08/colorado.lesbians.church/index.html?hpt=T2

This reminds me of all the people who said that private churches would never be forced to marry gay people, and yet here we are. If this goes through, sounds like supporters of proposition 8 will have a lot more firepower in their arsenal saying that if such marriages are recognized then the churches will have to support such relationships, even if they are not allowed in their teachings.

Given that this is a private religious school, is it within their rights to permit only those students where the student and their family subscribe to the teachings and beliefs of the church?

They should take anyone that's willing to pay tuition and subscribe to their curriculum. I don't see why the kid's parents don't just put him in another school, unless, of course, that's the only school in the area. Says the kid's in pre-school. Usually Catholic schools have really cheap pre-school/day care programs.

---------- Post added at 08:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:33 PM ----------

Maybe you are right about the schools. But I'm curious. Why gay catholics keeps calling themselves catholics? They are christians and christians come in a big variety of flavors. It's not like they can't be against another set of beliefs and keep the same god.

Same reason there are gay republicans? Being gay doesn't automatically alter things and ideals that you've been grown up with.

 

[@Li3n]

Maybe you are right about the schools. But I'm curious. Why gay catholics keeps calling themselves catholics? They are christians and christians come in a big variety of flavors. It's not like they can't be against another set of beliefs and keep the same god.

Same reason people who have sex outside (before) marriage do...

I don't see why the kid's parents don't just put him in another school, unless, of course, that's the only school in the area.

Comment you're not going to see: Because they're pissed about a stupid decision?!

 

[tegid]

Also, Cog, don't forget that religion has a very important social component.

(For the record, I also think/thought that people who disagree significantly with one sect of a religion maybe should not say they are part of it, but I've come to accept thats just not how it works)

 

[Green_Lantern]

I don't think that faith should ever be a valid justification to get away with anything, at best, it only redirect/spread the guilt and people are very naivy when it comes to understand the weight of religion in ours lives or how impossible varied religions views can be.

 

[Iaculus]

Me, I'd say that the school is entirely within its rights to pull stupid shit that's going to net it and its patron organisation a whooole lot of bad PR.

Unless it's taking funding from the government, there's no reason for them to take a part in this.

 

[Green_Lantern]

Me, I'd say that the school is entirely within its rights to pull stupid shit that's going to net it and its patron organisation a whooole lot of bad PR.

Unless it's taking funding from the government, there's no reason for them to take a part in this.

would you accept this if it was a non-religious school?

 

[tegid]

or for a non-religious reason?

Are bussinesses in the US in general allowed to choose their customers? Like, say, I own a groceries store and I decide we don't serve Mexicans. Is that legal?

 

[blotsfan]

I believe restaraunt often say that they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. They just usually don't because it'd be bad for business.

 

[AshburnerX]

or for a non-religious reason?

Are bussinesses in the US in general allowed to choose their customers? Like, say, I own a groceries store and I decide we don't serve Mexicans. Is that legal?

You can't discriminate based on religion, ethnicity, background, or gender if you are a business (like a store or restaurant). You CAN if your private club which has select membership and clearly states it's restrictions upfront (which is why things like the Aryan Nations are allowed to operate in open and why the Boy Scouts of America are allowed to kick out gay scouts and scoutmasters) OR if your customers don't meet any minimum standards you require and have posted (which is why a business can deny you service if you don't speak English, which technically isn't discrimination according tot he law).

 

[tegid]

Thanks for the info!

Taking that into account, I can see how the school issue could be argued both ways...

 

[AshburnerX]

Thanks for the info!

Taking that into account, I can see how the school issue could be argued both ways...

Actually, it really can't. Private schools are allowed to set any standards of admission they want because they are technically private clubs. This is why it's still possible to have gender segregated schools in this day and age. You can't FORCE an private institution to accept a student for the same reason you can't force the Boy Scouts to take gay members.

 

[Green_Lantern]

Thanks for the info!

Taking that into account, I can see how the school issue could be argued both ways...

Actually, it really can't. Private schools are allowed to set any standards of admission they want because they are technically private clubs. This is why it's still possible to have gender segregated schools in this day and age. You can't FORCE an private institution to accept a student for the same reason you can't force the Boy Scouts to take gay members.[/QUOTE]

Question: Do you believe that is a good thing?

 

[Cog]

I don't know the answer.

That depends on your definition of "free country"