University of Illinois Instructor Fired Over Catholic Beliefs

[Straw Man]

I would love to ask him for a clarification; since reality always changes, does true morality even exist?

questions about morality as it pertains to religion are all completely subjective

some christians think dancing is immoral or drinking on alchohol or having sex without the intent to procreate, or in Muslim country a woman going outside without a head scarf, etc...

it's all just a bunch of arbitrary rules

still the statement that this guy was censored (much less liberal censorship at it's worst is fucking laughable.   Just a complete paranoid delusion

[Soul Crusher]

questions about morality as it pertains to religion are all completely subjective

some christians think dancing is immoral or drinking on alchohol or having sex without the intent to procreate, or in Muslim country a woman going outside without a head scarf, etc...

it's all just a bunch of arbitrary rules

still the statement that this guy was censored (much less liberal censorship at it's worst is fucking laughable.   Just a complete paranoid delusion

The left wingers like yourself are usually the ones seeking to stifle speech on campuses. 

The left hates free speech with a passion.  Whether its "hate speech codes", banning speakers from campuses, attacking speakers at colleges, etc, the left wingers are far morte intolerant of those they disagree with than those they point the finger at. 

They can't debate a topic on the merits, so they seek to squash it. 

[Dos Equis]

I would love to ask him for a clarification; since reality always changes, does true morality even exist?

Yes, it does exist.  I think we've had this discussion before?  There is a lot of black and white it comes to morality. 

[Straw Man]

The left wingers like yourself are usually the ones seeking to stifle speech on campuses. 

The left hates free speech with a passion.  Whether its "hate speech codes", banning speakers from campuses, attacking speakers at colleges, etc, the left wingers are far morte intolerant of those they disagree with than those they point the finger at. 

They can't debate a topic on the merits, so they seek to squash it. 

I'm all for free speech and I think that's pretty evident from everything I've ever posted on this site

this has nothing to do with free speech or censorship.

this guy was not censored

he is free to say or write or publish whatever he would like

the school is free to choose not to offer this guy a job next year for any reason they like whether or for absolutely no reason at all.  Thats the nature of his emloyment

[Dos Equis]

The left wingers like yourself are usually the ones seeking to stifle speech on campuses.  

The left hates free speech with a passion.  Whether its "hate speech codes", banning speakers from campuses, attacking speakers at colleges, etc, the left wingers are far morte intolerant of those they disagree with than those they point the finger at.  

They can't debate a topic on the merits, so they seek to squash it.  

Absolutely correct.  They try and shout down/silence people with opposing viewpoints.  Remember the left-wing hate speech thread I created?  Numerous examples of liberals trying to censor things they disagree with.  Look at how liberals in Canada tried to intimidate Ann Coulter.  Threatened her with prosecution.    

The fact a religious professor was let go because he made a garden variety comment about a religious issue that offended a homosexual student (assuming the student was homosexual) is just crazy.  

[Straw Man]

Absolutely correct.  They try and shout down/silence people with opposing viewpoints.  Remember the left-wing hate speech thread I created?  Numerous examples of liberals trying to censor things they disagree with.  Look at what liberals in Canada tried to intimidate Ann Coulter.  Threatened her with prosecution.    

The fact a religious professor was let go because he made a garden variety comment about a religious issue that offended a homosexual student (assuming the student was homosexual) is just crazy.  

only problem with your statement is that he wasn't "silenced' and he wasn't "let go"

what is it about Christians (and Muslims too) that they love to feel persercuted so much that they actually make it up where it doesn't even exist at all.   Muslim are much worse then christians.  They are constantly finding ways they feel insulted and use that as justification for all their violent and nutty actions

[Dos Equis]

For the benefit of those who are not paranoid anti-religious extremists and are capable of critical thinking, an adjunct signs a semester/quarter or yearly contract with no guarantee of future employment.  But, when the adjunct is good and is repeatedly rehired for years, there is an expectation that he or she will continue to be offered a new contract.  In fact, the adjunct’s name will often appear on the school calendar for future terms before the contract is signed.  An adjunct who has worked continuously for nine years at the same school is a fixture.  Universities are dependent on adjuncts to teach courses.   

So yes, an adjunct whose contract is not renewed in this kind of situation was essentially let go. 

[drkaje]

Yes, it does exist.  I think we've had this discussion before?  There is a lot of black and white it comes to morality. 

I'm relatively convinced it (true morality) doesn't exist.

From the perspective of his Catholic faith, sex is for reproductive purposes. Obviously homosexuality (or any other practices that do not result in children) would be in conflict with their reality and therefore immoral.

Maybe he thinks gays aren't real.

[Fury]

I'm relatively convinced it (true morality) doesn't exist.

From the perspective of his Catholic faith, sex is for reproductive purposes. Obviously homosexuality (or any other practices that do not result in children) would be in conflict with their reality and therefore immoral.

Maybe he thinks gays aren't real.

Only in Iran.

[Dos Equis]

I'm relatively convinced it (true morality) doesn't exist.

From the perspective of his Catholic faith, sex is for reproductive purposes. Obviously homosexuality (or any other practices that do not result in children) would be in conflict with their reality and therefore immoral.

Maybe he thinks gays aren't real.

I'm absolutely convinced it does exist and I bet we would agree on whether a number of issues are moral/immoral.  

What part of his Catholic faith says sex is only for reproductive purposes?

The religious basis for concluding homosexuality is immoral is not limited to reproduction.  From a Christian standpoint, the Bible is very clear about homosexuality, both in the Old Testament and New.    

[Dos Equis]

Only in Iran.

lol   

[drkaje]

I'm absolutely convinced it does exist and I bet we would agree on whether a number of issues are moral/immoral.  

What part of his Catholic faith says sex is only for reproductive purposes?

The religious basis for concluding homosexuality is immoral is not limited to reproduction.  From a Christian standpoint, the Bible is very clear about homosexuality, both in the Old Testament and New.    

Anything that thwarts pregnancy is a sin, including pulling out, BJs anal, condoms, etc... You remember Onan, right?

Most major religions prohibit homosexuality so that's probably not relevant to what we're discussing. In the context of when they started out having children was very important and also a great way to control women. Even something like not eating pork made sense because there was no way to keep it fresh.

[Dos Equis]

Anything that thwarts pregnancy is a sin, including pulling out, BJs anal, condoms, etc... You remember Onan, right?

Most major religions prohibit homosexuality so that's probably not relevant to what we're discussing. In the context of when they started out having children was very important and also a great way to control women. Even something like not eating pork made sense because there was no way to keep it fresh.

I disagree.  I remember Onan.  Had nothing to do whether pulling out was a sin.  He was supposed to get a woman pregnant and refused by pulling out.  His sin was disobedience.  There is no teaching in the Bible or mainstream Christianity that sex is solely for procreation.  Not sure about Catholicism. 

You said:  "Obviously homosexuality (or any other practices that do not result in children) would be in conflict with their reality and therefore immoral." 

That's not accurate.  Homosexuality is in conflict with crystal clear Biblical teaching, which is why it is considered immoral by many (if not most) Christians.   

[drkaje]

I disagree.  I remember Onan.  Had nothing to do whether pulling out was a sin.  He was supposed to get a woman pregnant and refused by pulling out.  His sin was disobedience.  There is no teaching in the Bible or mainstream Christianity that sex is solely for procreation.  Not sure about Catholicism. 

You said:  "Obviously homosexuality (or any other practices that do not result in children) would be in conflict with their reality and therefore immoral." 

That's not accurate.  Homosexuality is in conflict with crystal clear Biblical teaching, which is why it is considered immoral by many (if not most) Christians.   

I wrote "their reality", LOL! There's a difference.

[Dos Equis]

I wrote "their reality", LOL! There's a difference.

There are people out there with warped realities.   

[drkaje]

There are people out there with warped realities.   

Put enough of them together and it becomes a religion.

[Straw Man]

For the benefit of those who are not paranoid anti-religious extremists and are capable of critical thinking, an adjunct signs a semester/quarter or yearly contract with no guarantee of future employment.  But, when the adjunct is good and is repeatedly rehired for years, there is an expectation that he or she will continue to be offered a new contract.  In fact, the adjunct’s name will often appear on the school calendar for future terms before the contract is signed.  An adjunct who has worked continuously for nine years at the same school is a fixture.  Universities are dependent on adjuncts to teach courses.   

So yes, an adjunct whose contract is not renewed in this kind of situation was essentially let go. 

he can expect a job all he wants but he's still a contractor and his temporary employer can choose not to rehire him next year and he can't say shit about it

that's how it works when you're a contractor

no one is stopping him from saying whaterve he wants and no one has redacted or censored his writing

his employer could have just decided that this guy is a pain in the ass and is causing problems that the head of the department doesn't want to deal with and ........end of story

the head of the department could also personally disagree or object to something this guy wrote an .....end of story

everyone on this board is free to go into their job and express whatever opinion they want and their employer is just as free to respond in whatever way they want within the legal confines of that employment agreement

[Dos Equis]

They have seen the light.   

University of Illinois Reinstates Instructor Fired Over Catholic Beliefs
By Diane Macedo
Published July 09, 2010 | FoxNews.com

A Catholicism instructor fired from the the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign for saying he agrees with the church's teaching that homosexual sex is immoral has been reinstated.

Adjunct professor Kenneth Howell said he was fired at the end of the spring semester after sending an e-mail explaining Catholic beliefs on homosexuality to his students preparing for an exam.

Now the University of Illinois says Howell will return next semester.

"The department of religion will continue Kenneth Howell's adjunct appointment for the fall semester, and has offered him the opportunity to teach Religion 127, Introduction to Catholicism," school spokesman Robin Kaler said in a statement.

Howell, who had been teaching at the university since 2001, was relieved of his teaching duties based in part on an anonymous complaint sent to university officials on May 13 saying an e-mail Howell sent to his class amounted to "hate speech."

"Natural Moral Law says that Morality must be a response to REALITY," Howell wrote in the May 4 e-mail. "In other words, sexual acts are only appropriate for people who are complementary, not the same."

Howell was then called into a meeting on May 28 with Robert McKim, the Head of the Department of Religion, at which McKim told Howell that, due to complaints generated by the e-mail, a "higher official" decided Howell would no longer be able to teach at the university, according to the Alliance Defense Fund, which is representing Howell.

The Alliance Defense Fund attorneys sent a letter to university officials on July 12 requesting he be reinstated on the grounds that the university's actions violated his First Amendment rights.

The school responded with a July 28 letter that admitted no wrongdoing but stated, "The School of Literatures, Cultures and Linguistics will be contacting Dr. Howell to offer him the opportunity to teach Religion 127, Introduction to Catholicism, on a visiting instructional appointment at the University of Illinois, for the fall 2010 semester."

The University says it will continue its review of the situation surrounding the earlier decision not to offer Dr. Howell a teaching assignment for the fall semester.

"This offer of appointment does not affect the process or outcome of a review by the Faculty Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure," Kaler said. "The University of Illinois is committed to upholding principles of academic freedom and the requirements of the First Amendment."

The school also says it will begin paying the salary of instructors teaching any Catholic studies courses that can be taken for university credit; they were previously funded by an on-campus Catholic Center.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/09/university-illinois-reinstates-instructor-fired-catholic-beliefs/

[drkaje]

Did common sense actually win here?!?!

[Dos Equis]

Did common sense actually win here?!?!

Yep. 

[drkaje]

Yep. 

Didn't think that was possible in this day and age.

[Dos Equis]

Didn't think that was possible in this day and age.

I think the negative publicity and risk of getting sued played a role. 

[Skip8282]

Yep. 

haha...I think it may be better to say "we'll see".

[Dos Equis]

haha...I think it may be better to say "we'll see".

True.

[drkaje]

Cases like this are such a waste of time that it's impossible it could be resolved quickly and with any common sense.