But as a point of fact the Catholic Church does teach that homosexual acts are morally wrong.
So in a course on Catholicism what else could he teach but what Catholicism in fact teaches?
The university has decided that, one, no Catholic can be allowed to teach Catholicism, and two, whoever does teach it must lie about the actual beliefs of the Catholic Church.
Freedom? What’s that? I think I’ve heard my grandparents talk about it but I only have a vague recollection of what it is.
Two links for further edification, first is from the Professor:
E-mail that prompted complaint over UI religion class instructor
Other Related ContentInstructor of Catholicism at UI claims loss of job violates academic freedom
E-mail complaint from student about UI religion instructor
From: Kenneth J. Howell
Date: Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:45 PM
Subject: Utilitarianism and Sexuality (for those in 447 FYI)
Next, an email complaint from a student who didn’t like the Professor’s example of homosexuality (this wasn’t even a student who took the class:
These emails are well worth reading in their entirety.
“…a student complained about a discussion of homosexuality…”
Gaystapo;
Homo-Leninists in action; unable to handle a philosophy, but willing to force others to submit to their beliefs and lifestyles.
Hey Protestants! Those of you whose churches haven't already capitulated to the queers, brace for collision! The sodomites will be after you, next.
If the queer SOB did not want to hear the message, he should have left the meeting.
How far we behind have we left our Western roots: nobody seems to notice that the word "professor" stems from "profess" --- to declared openly, to affirm a belief.
I wonder if they have any classes on islam. If so, I wonder if the professor shares the muslim view on homosexuality and how they handle them in islamic states. If so, I wonder if the professor has been accused of “hate speech” and has been fired.
The Text book probably had something mentioning it. Many times Teachers and yes even professors follow a strict syllabus and can’t deter from it. I think that could be his fight in court if he goes. If he wandered off on his own away from the syllabus, he could be in trouble.
Eaxactly
I did miss the part in the article where the ACLU is suing on behlf of the Professor.
...After losing his teaching position with the UI, Howell was told by the Newman Center that he would no longer be employed there either. The Newman Center referred requests for comment to the diocese office in Peoria.
This is troubling. They do say they are going to talk to the University but they could be a little more forthright in giving the professor some back-up.
So it was with Roe versus Wade. People were having abortions and doctors were performing them before the Supreme Court decision. The medical people performing them were offering that is was for the health and welfare of the mother. Both the doctors and the women getting abortions were burdened with guilt and societal censure. That's why people burdened with that guilt pushed so hard to get an affirmation from a respected body like the Supreme Court for the dark deed they were performing.
That is what this enormous push for approval of the homosexual way of acting is all about. They can get an occasional teacher fired. They can lay an assault on the clergy all they want. They can come up with propaganda phrases like ‘homophobe’. They can lobby politicians to pass laws saying that we can not be resistant to their acts. In the end it will do no good. Inherent in most people is the genetic inclination to be resistant.
So believing in what you are teaching is a no no - right?
In a course that deals with philsosophy, is it unethical to tell students why Catholic philosophy teaches what it teaches?
Is it illegal to say, "I'm a Catholic and I agree with that"?
Or all three?
This wouldn't have been the ditch I wanted to die in, but I guess you don't get to choose.
After reading the emails I come to the conclusion that whoever fired the professor is either and homosexual agenda activist themselves or a spineless idiot. Regardless, the accusatory email was hearsay and the professor never had the opportunity to face his wimpy anonymous accuser...
You offer classes on “Catholic” thought, but if the teacher actually teaches what that means, it's the teacher who erred?
You chose to take a class on “Catholic” thought and then you object to being told what it really means?
It's like the patients who run the insane asylum.
As an adjunct Professor of Humanities who teaches Religion classes at a State Community College, this is a bit disquieting. Not surprising though. Hope he and the ADF presses this case and it sets a strong precedent to protect First Amendment Rights and Academic freedom for ALL professors, despite their political leanings or religious affiliations. Liberty is liberty.
How dare he use reason (which comes from God) against those who treasure reason above God. He makes too much sense and therefore must no longer teach impressionable students!
It appears that the persecution of any Catholic or Christian who teaches moral truth has begun! Or shall I say, is continuing?