What a Gay Man’s Court Victory Over a Catholic Girls School Means

The Daily Signal ^ | 01-26-2016 | Diana Stancy

[NRx]

A court ruling against a Catholic girls school that declined to hire a gay man in a non-classroom job highlights the need for such religious institutions to do a better job of spelling out their teachings and expectations for potential employees, a Catholic educator said.

“Parents and extended family members who entrust their children to a faith-based institution expect consistent messages and integrity of teaching from the church and the school,” Denise Donohue, deputy director of K-12 programs for the Cardinal Newman Society, told The Daily Signal.

Donohue’s comments came after a Massachusetts state judge ruled that the Catholic school discriminated against a gay man by retracting a job offer upon learning his sexual orientation.

Fontbonne Academy had offered a position to Matthew Barrett as a food services director in 2013. Before doing so, the private school said, officials told Barrett that all employees were assumed to exemplify Catholic teachings and values, and he agreed to those terms.

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

Thanks for the lesson. Sad.

The 60s really was the nail that sealed our coffin.

[livius]

Way back in the 1980s, Cardinal O’Connor actually made the government back down on trying to force foster care institutions to provide or refer children for abortions by threatening to get out of the business.

Unfortunately, none of the bishops after him had the guts to do this, and now these institutions have either been driven out of business by local laws or are pathetically appealing not to be forced into doing abortion referrals.

The problem is that the cowardly bishops didn’t stand up and the state got so powerful that it now feels it can do anything it wants to and it really doesn’t care whether these services are provided or not. The important thing is not care or even education, but indoctrination. Islam is very useful to the state because it demands total obedience.

[Albion Wilde]

bump

[mumblypeg]

“...highlights the need for such religious institutions to do a better job of spelling out their teachings and expectations for potential employees, a Catholic educator said.”

I stopped reading right there.
What part of “Catholic organizations neither condone nor encourage sodomy; persons who openly profess engaging in sodomy will not be contactually employed” is difficult to understand?

[mumblypeg]

You nailed it.
The guy “came out” as being actively engaged in a perverse, ungodly relationship.
IMO the gays—as well as the rest of us—were far better off when they stayed “in the closet.”
They knew they were doing something unnatural, so they were discreet. Over the decades, I worked with numerous apparent homosexuals (we called them “bachelors”) and never ever witnessed anybody being fired for their presumed sexual proclivities, simply because nobody’s sex life was discussed in the workplace.
You were hired, promoted, or fired based on job competency. Period.
Gay marriage means they are out of the closet and in everybody’s face with their proclivities.
Now they MUST be hired and given access to children—BECAUSE of what they do. And it’s their “right” to talk about their sexual obsessions, even in front of children, because disallowing same is now “discrimination.”