Catholic School Sees Backlash After Firing Gay Teacher

[Mr.1derful]

I have absolutely no inclination to defend the Catholic Church, but last time I checked, Jesus was against homosexuality.

[Straw Man]

I have absolutely no inclination to defend the Catholic Church, but last time I checked, Jesus was against homosexuality.

can you post the quote from Jesus where he says this?

[tonymctones]

Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.

The post from jag I was responding to...

yup ever notice how the majority are pedophiles too?

homo pedophiles are crafty bastards

My post...

only a determined retard would come up with the conclusion you did

[Straw Man]

The post from jag I was responding to...
My post...

only a determined retard would come up with the conclusion you did

why didn't you challenge my summation of your argument the first time I made it ?

why did you claim that the majority of these priest were Pedophiles and try to support it with an article which is claiming that 80-90% of the priest doing the abuse are NOT pedophiles but rather just homosexuals (or did you misunderstand that claim in the article as well)?

at best, you statement is claiming that the majority of gay priest are pedophiles so why don't you show us some proof of that

[tonymctones]

why didn't you challenge my summation of your argument the first time I made it ?

why did you claim that the majority of these priest were Pedophiles and try to support it with an article which is claiming that 80-90% of the priest doing the abuse are NOT pedophiles but rather just homosexuals (or did you misunderstand that claim in the article as well)?

at best, you statement is claiming that the majority of gay priest are pedophiles so why don't you show us some proof of that

you asked me for a source and I gave you a source...youre the one who went full retard with it

No my statement along with my citation show that the majority of pedophiles within the church are gay.

for fuck sake, youre a dumb ass today

[Straw Man]

you asked me for a source and I gave you a source...youre the one who went full retard with it

No my statement along with my citation show that the majority of pedophiles within the church are gay.

for fuck sake, youre a dumb ass today

again, go read your source

it's claiming that 80-90% of the priest who commit these offense are NOT PEDOPHILES

if your claim is that the majority of gay priests are also pedophiles then show some proof of that claim

YOUR SOURCE claims that only 1.5% to 5% of all priest are implicated in the abuse so all you have to do is show that 1.5% to 5% of these priest constitute a majority of the priests who are also homosexual

here is a recent article claiming that ~ 58% of priest are gay so maybe you think that 1.5% to 5% of 58% is a majority

now if only 10% of priest are gay then the claim in your source that 1.5% to 5% are committing the acts would still not be a majority

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

[Mr.1derful]

can you post the quote from Jesus where he says this?

Don't be a simpleton.  The Bible, upon which Christ's teachings were based, is clear in its view of homosexuality.  Jesus didn’t encourage his followers to accept any and all lifestyles. He taught that the way to salvation is open to “everyone exercising faith in him.” (John 3:16) Exercising faith in Jesus includes conforming to God’s moral code, which forbids certain types of conduct​, including homosexuality.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11


Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10  thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11  And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.

Leviticus 18:22

“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act.

Romans 1:26, 27

 That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27  likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error.





 

[Straw Man]

Don't be a simpleton.  The Bible, upon which Christ's teachings were based, is clear in its view of homosexuality.  Jesus didn’t encourage his followers to accept any and all lifestyles. He taught that the way to salvation is open to “everyone exercising faith in him.” (John 3:16) Exercising faith in Jesus includes conforming to God’s moral code, which forbids certain types of conduct​, including homosexuality.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11


Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10  thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11  And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.

Leviticus 18:22

“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act.

Romans 1:26, 27

 That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27  likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error.

you said Jesus was against homosexuality and the supposed words of Jesus are  in the Bible so show me the quote from Jesus where he says this

[Mr.1derful]

you said Jesus was against homosexuality and the supposed words of Jesus are  in the Bible so show me the quote from Jesus where he says this

As I stated, don't be a simpleton. 

[Straw Man]

As I stated, don't be a simpleton.  

a simpleton would be someone who claims jesus is against homosexuality but then can't provide a single quote from Jesus saying this

I assume you are aware that the bible contains the (alleged) words of jesus

you can even go find a red letter edition that puts his words in red text

have it champ and let me know when you find that quote

[tonymctones]

again, go read your source

it's claiming that 80-90% of the priest who commit these offense are NOT PEDOPHILES

if your claim is that the majority of gay priests are also pedophiles then show some proof of that claim

YOUR SOURCE claims that only 1.5% to 5% of all priest are implicated in the abuse so all you have to do is show that 1.5% to 5% of these priest constitute a majority of the priests who are also homosexual

here is a recent article claiming that ~ 58% of priest are gay so maybe you think that 1.5% to 5% of 58% is a majority

now if only 10% of priest are gay then the claim in your source that 1.5% to 5% are committing the acts would still not be a majority

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/07/29/catholic-priests-its-empirical-fact-that-many-clergy-are-gay

my source states that of the incidents of abuse by priest 80%-90% are on adolescent boys by males...

My statement was not about the entire population, but a specific group of individuals in response to a comment about the specific group of individuals.

[Straw Man]

my source states that of the incidents of abuse by priest 80%-90% are on adolescent boys by males...

My statement was not about the entire population, but a specific group of individuals in response to a comment about the specific group of individuals.

Is your statement in response to the last line in Jag's statement that "if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew."

Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating against him.

They may have the right to refuse to perform the ceremony, but they shouldn't be allowed to fire him for it.

Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.

yup ever notice how the majority are pedophiles too?

homo pedophiles are crafty bastards

[Mr.1derful]

Do they fire heterosexuals who announce plans to marry? If not, they're discriminating against him.

They may have the right to refuse to perform the ceremony, but they shouldn't be allowed to fire him for it.

Besides, if being gay was a valid justification for terminating employment, the Catholic Church would have to function on a skeleton crew.

I won't attempt for a moment to defend the Catholic Church, which is one of the most corrupt and hypocritical institutions in the history of the world.  However, it is not uncommon for organizations to have morals clauses or codes of conduct to maintain membership or employment.  Homosexuality is against the tenants of Christianity, of which I'm sure this teacher was well aware.  If one knows the rules, but knowingly violates them, it should not come as any surprise when the infraction results in dismissal.

Nowadays "modern society" ventures to force alternative lifestyles into acceptance.  If an institution does not condone such alternate lifestyles, no one is forcing anyone to be a member.  They are free to seek out institutions that are more accepting of it.  Instead though, it has become the norm to force an organization to bend to the will of such people, even if it means contradicting the very principles of its existence.  

[tu_holmes]

While discrimination and religious entities sounds like it should be an oxymoron, it's not...

It is also within their right to do so... People can choose to be a part of those religions or not.

If people choose to do so, then they are accepting the doctrine of the religion. Including their dislike of homosexuality if they have one.

If people don't like it, they should leave the church.

No one is forcing them to stay.

[Mr.1derful]

a simpleton would be someone who claims jesus is against homosexuality but then can't provide a single quote from Jesus saying this

I assume you are aware that the bible contains the (alleged) words of jesus

you can even go find a red letter edition that puts his words in red text

have it champ and let me know when you find that quote

I addressed the crux of your question very clearly.  It is of little consequence to me that you choose to disregard it.  You seem to be asserting that Jesus condoned and promoted homosexuality.  Show me that quote, champ.  Go quibble with someone else who is more apt to entertain your foolishness.

[Straw Man]

I addressed the crux of your question very clearly.  It is of little consequence to me that you choose to disregard it.  You seem to be asserting that Jesus condoned and promoted homosexuality.  Show me that quote, champ.  Go quibble with someone else who is more apt to entertain your foolishness.

LOL - how in the world do you get the idea that I'm asserting that Jesus promoted homosexuality

You're the one who said specifically that "Jesus was against homosexuality"

All I asked was that you provide the quote from Jesus where he said this

If there is no quote from Jesus then all you can say is that Jesus never spoke about homosexuality

Apparently in your world if one does not speak on a topic that must mean they are "promoting it"

[24KT]

I won't attempt for a moment to defend the Catholic Church, which is one of the most corrupt and hypocritical institutions in the history of the world.  However, it is not uncommon for organizations to have morals clauses or codes of conduct to maintain membership or employment.  Homosexuality is against the tenants of Christianity, of which I'm sure this teacher was well aware.  If one knows the rules, but knowingly violates them, it should not come as any surprise when the infraction results in dismissal.

Nowadays "modern society" ventures to force alternative lifestyles into acceptance.  If an institution does not condone such alternate lifestyles, no one is forcing anyone to be a member.  They are free to seek out institutions that are more accepting of it.  Instead though, it has become the norm to force an organization to bend to the will of such people, even if it means contradicting the very principles of its existence.  

I would think the Catholic Church's long standing tradition of turning a blind eye and covering up predatory & criminal sexual abuse by its members is the biggest contradiction to whatever moral code or principles it claims to have.  There's a reason Benedict stepped down, ...and it had nothing to do with old age or ill health.

[whork]

Don't be a simpleton.  The Bible, upon which Christ's teachings were based, is clear in its view of homosexuality.  Jesus didn’t encourage his followers to accept any and all lifestyles. He taught that the way to salvation is open to “everyone exercising faith in him.” (John 3:16) Exercising faith in Jesus includes conforming to God’s moral code, which forbids certain types of conduct​, including homosexuality.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11


Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10  thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11  And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.

Leviticus 18:22

“‘You must not lie down with a male in the same way that you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable act.

Romans 1:26, 27

 That is why God gave them over to uncontrolled sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27  likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full penalty, which was due for their error.





 

Or rich people:


Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."

Rich gays definetly go to hell

[Archer77]

LOL - how in the world do you get the idea that I'm asserting that Jesus promoted homosexuality

You're the one who said specifically that "Jesus was against homosexuality"

All I asked was that you provide the quote from Jesus where he said this

If there is no quote from Jesus then all you can say is that Jesus never spoke about homosexuality

Apparently in your world if one does not speak on a topic that must mean they are "promoting it"

I'm not a believer but Jesus said he wasn't there to change the law but fulfill it thereby endorsing Old Testament views on homosexuality.  He wouldn't have had to promote an anti-homosexual agenda because one was already firmly established in the Old Testament as a matter of doctrine.

[Dos Equis]

Under the law, they may have the right to the belief, however, do they have the right to act on it under the law?

Of course they do.

[Straw Man]

I'm not a believer but Jesus said he wasn't there to change the law but fulfill it thereby endorsing Old Testament views on homosexuality.  He wouldn't have had to promote an anti-homosexual agenda because one was already firmly established in the Old Testament as a matter of doctrine.

so your interpretation is that jesus lack of comment on homosexuality is tacit approval of statements in the Old Testament ?

do I understand your point of view correctly?

[Archer77]

so your interpretation is that jesus lack of comment on homosexuality is tacit approval of statements in the Old Testament ?

do I understand your point of view correctly?

Yes, absolutely.  He said that he would change nothing of the law before him. He was continuing the traditions and laws before him, of which the condemnation of homosexuality is one.   He made no exceptions.

[Straw Man]

Yes, absolutely.  He said that he would change nothing of the law before him. He was continuing the traditions and laws before him, of which the condemnation of homosexuality is one.   He made no exceptions.

so if jesus didn't specifically comment on all the other crazy shit in the old testament then he must also support that to

correct?

[Archer77]

so if jesus didn't specifically comment on all the other crazy shit in the old testament then he must also support that to

correct?

He said he supported the interpretation of the law and cultural practices written before  him and had no intention of altering it. This is clearly approval.  If it had been important enought to address I'm sure it would have come up.

[Straw Man]

He said he supported the interpretation of the law and cultural practices written before  him and had no intention of altering it. This is clearly approval.  If it had been important enought to address I'm sure it would have come up.

is that a yes to my question?

btw - can we also assume jesus fully supports everything in the new testament as well