Gay couple protests after Catholic school denies daughter's entry

The Olympian ^ | 8/30/03 | AP

[I_Love_My_Husband]

EUGENE, Ore. -- A lesbian couple alleges that O'Hara Catholic School refused admission to their 4-year-old daughter because of their sexual orientation.

The couple has complained to the Eugene Human Rights Commission and the Oregon Child Care Division.

One of the women, Lee Inkmann, said O'Hara Principal Dianne Bert told her in mid-August that having a family with two mothers at the school would confuse other children, and that gay unions are in conflict with Vatican teachings.

[montag813]

That minor financial seperation will not stop ACLU alumni on the Courts from invalidating the private nature of a religious organization. This is what makes Bush and Frist's pathetic bending over to Schumer & Co. so maddening. Instead of making them do 24/7 filibusters or making dozens of recess appointments over and over (as he is allowed) to fill every single court vacancy with a hard right-wing justice, Bush/Frist are just sitting around doing NOTHING to defend their goddamned nominees. It makes me so mad.

[ChemistCat]

Once again.

It was "Feed my sheep...Feed my lambs." Not, "Accept the lamb only if it has the right pedigree."

It was "...And forbid them not." It wasn't, "Question her parents and make sure that they are perfectly worthy for their child to come to Me."

When you put a bureaucracy in charge, you get fine print, caveats, and policies instead of proper Christlike love and charity. And you sure make it easy for people who want confrontation to get what they want. Misery for everybody. If they'd quietly let the child in, and coped, where would the misery be?

What did Christ tell us about the extra mile? It wasn't a good Christian making a demand in that parable, you know. But it's the good Christian who goes the extra mile. Ever walk a mile carrying a heavy load? It isn't "go the extra mile if it's light and easy and you feel like it anyway."

Some people listen to that about as well as they listen to the also-inconvenient reference to millstones.

Your church has a chance to make things better for a little kid, and you say it'll hurt her too much to let her be exposed to the Christian teachings her mother is seeking for her...because it might cause a conflict. So she'll grow up knowing that Jesus Christ's church rejected her before she was 5. Wow. That is sure a great missionary tactic your church has there.

You think having lesbian parents isn't going to hurt her no matter what? Why not embrace and include her?

Oh yeah, I remember why.

[saradippity]

I have always admired the Mormons because they take care of their own,generally they are decent,kind and moral.

In Arizona I have heard many people criticize them for not extending their "good works" outside of their church membership.I have supported their right to provide for their own church family.It is no one elses business how good people choose to use their resources,especially when they never ask the general public to support them.

People returning from Utah have commented that living there was very difficult because although it was very safe and clean,they were also "social pariahs" because they were not Mormon. I have remarked that if excluding people whose behaviors were considered to be below the standards (most complainers were drinkers)Mormons had set up for their community maybe the Mormons had more sense than they did. And after all,the complainers were free to move on,or stay and enjoy the good things those communities offered.

I was surprised when you stated you were Mormon.

[Luis Gonzalez]

If the school accepts any funding whatsoever from any level of government, they will be hard-pressed to maintain their position...separate Church and State or expect the Church to fall.

You can't be both independent, and accept money from the government.

If the school is truly private, they can thumb their noses at this complaint.

I've been arguing for quite sometime that all Churches should voluntarily walk away from their tax exemptions, and eliminate that achilles heel as well.

If you accept monies from the government, in turn they will expect you to play by their rules.

[ChemistCat]

I have no use for a so-called Christian who wants to see Membership records in Good Standing before they'll help you push-start your car. Such a person hasn't read the same Bible I read. All religious organizations are stuffed full of people like that...you're lucky if your local branch isn't.

I said I have my kids in a Lutheran school and they (the Lutherans there) are extremely accepting, open, giving people who concentrate on what they are doing for others rather than constantly scrutinizing others for flaws. More Christlike people I have never met. I would like to think that an LDS private school would be better-run but I honestly don't see how it could be improved. Good hiring decisions on the part of a good principal who accepts everybody, then holds them all to the same high standards. Low barriers, high standards work together to turn out excellent alumni of any program--and this is exactly the opposite of what has ruined so many organizations and professions, that have high admissions barriers and low membership standards. See your education majors, see your Catholic priests--anybody who must meet incredibly convoluted requirements to enter a profession, then, once there, need meet virtually no standard of conduct or competence at all to remain within it. There are good people who run the gauntlet, then remain good; their accomplishments are so heavily tarnished by the bad ones who make it past the gauntlet and abuse the system ever after.

I hope nobody thinks I believe the state (at any level) should force this school to take anybody. Private is private. They have a right to accept or reject any applicant for any reason, and they don't have to say why. I think they are unChristian in what they've done. I do not think they have no RIGHT to do it. It's wrong but legal.

Still: she's four--how many reasons to reject her could there be besides the sexuality of her parents? So they're being deceptive there, something not terribly unusual for that kind of bureaucracy. It's clear why they turned her down. And it's a terrible twisting of Christ's message to us. This little girl has been rejected by Christ's agent on earth. She will always know that.

It isn't Love Thy Neighbor IF.... Goodnight, all.

[TotusTuus]

So she'll grow up knowing that Jesus Christ's church rejected her before she was 5.

Oh, BALONEY! Jesus Christ's Church hasn't rejected anyone in this situation. There is more to being a Catholic than formal elementary education. I myself went to public schools.

From the article, none of us know the specifics of why the child is being denied admission. In any event, the school has that right. Truth be told, there are waiting lists for most Catholic schools, and many students that do attend come from non-Catholic families.

Regarding the child, I don't even know if she has been baptized. I can tell you that the Church does not normally baptize children of parents who do not promise to raise them in the Faith. Several reasons for this. The Church is more than the hierarchy - Her members are ALL the baptized. ALL adult Catholics have the responsibility to guide children correctly in the Faith. Since baptism is akin to "birth", not raising a baptized child in the Faith is akin to throwing a newborn out on the street right after birth. It is spiritual abuse. Just as there are laws and punishment in secular society against physical abuse of children, so on the spiritual side.

These two lesbian "love-mates", who are the guardians of the child are living in a continuous state of mortal sin. They have separated themselves from Christ and His Church. The Church desires that they come back into full communion by "confessing their sins, doing penance, and amending their lives for the better". Their obstinate refusal to do this shows that they are not capable of raising their child in the Faith. So is the Church failing the child? At the domestic level, YES. That is, her parents - as primary guardians of her soul in her childhood, and this to the extent that at least one of them claims to want to start practicing her Faith again. Among other things, receiving Christ in one's life means rejecting sin. There are many quotes in Scripture that indicate this.

Put the question like this. Should the Church have the right to take the child away from her parents? Short of this the best the Church can do for the child is hold up the teachings of Christ and hope the parents will convert. Remember, the parents are the PRIMARY teachings of their child. It is THEY, through their lifestyle that are denying a proper Catholic upbringing for their child. At which point, we can only hope that the child will come to the fullness of Truth after mature reflection at a later time as she grows. At this point the parents are an obstacle to this.

[Robert_Paulson2]

You can't be both independent, and accept money from the government.

---

"no man can serve masters"

[Robert_Paulson2]

STFU?
Real christian communication tonight eh?

[Conservative til I die]

Whether a private school falls under the mantle of "public accommodation" is open to interpretation, but Dave Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon American Civil Liberties Union, says it should.

Orwell would be proud. So now public and private mean the same thing. Un-f*cking-believable.

A Catholic school, he said, "is essentially a business that provides service to the public at large."

Uh, no it doesn't. It's a Catholic school, for Catholics who pay a tuitition to go there. It isn't open to the general public anymore than my house is. What an idiot. I really hate liberals from the depths of my soul.

[Conservative til I die]

It's about infiltration and confrontation. The more and more I read about gays and live and work with and around them, the more I realize they have a real sickness of the soul. It's not enough to be able to play hide the peepee with whatever gender you want, it's about throwing it in people's faces, being a martyr, acting on a sexual addiction and copulating with as many people as possible, and living in a state of arrested development.

[Conservative til I die]

There's actually some clown on FreeRepublic who loves the ACLU and considers it a defender of religious freedom. I forget his name, otherwise I'd ping him to this thread so he could print his mash notes to the ACLU for all to see.

[Conservative til I die]

"The ACLU is a terrorist organization, waging Jihad on morality in America."

Heads up dude, they're attacking your heroes.

[Conservative til I die]

In Manhattan, at some of the more outdated parishes, I would gather that most of the students at Catholic schools aren't even Catholic. I used to have a girlfriend that attended high school over in the 30s all the way on the West Side, and it was probably 75% black. I guess they want to fill the school rather than close it down, even though closing it down might make more sense.

The high schools on the Upper East Side don't require you to be a member of any particular parish. Of course catholic high schools are a little different than catholic grade schools, but yeah, there's no hard, universal rule about who gets admitted to Catholic school.

[Conservative til I die]

Another non-Catholic trying to set the admission policies for Catholic schools. Honestly, there isn't a difference between you or the lesbo parents in this matter, in either case as outsiders you should MIND YOUR OWN DAMNED BUSINESS.

[Conservative til I die]

I don't know what Catholics teach,

Gee, no kidding.

but what I'm seeing on this thread makes me wonder if what has happened with the molesting priests really is an aberration

You libelous scumbag.

[Conservative til I die]

Look ma! Another anti-Catholic transparently using this as an excuse to take yet another shot at the Church!

[Conservative til I die]

Thank you. Jorge is so transparent. "But I care about the children!" Bullcrap. He just doesn't like the Church and is using this to take jabs.

[ninenot]

Well, if you really think it's a church obligation, then there must be a Mormon stake up there. Write to them and, using the same arguments you use here, see if they are persuaded to allow these actively perverted parents to be 'members' of the Stake and their abused daughter to be educated by their school. You blithely suggest that "they should cope" while being totally unaware of the misery to which you will consign this little girl AND all the other parents whose children attend the school. And you claim to be a parent? Not in the real world, you're not.

Let's be frank. Your concept of Christian charity is a bit cockeyed, although you quote fragments very well. The question here is not whether one should be charitable: that is a settled issue. The question here is whether the school administration can arrogate to themselves, and then dispense, the charity of others, and the answer they have given is "no." It is not within their power to do so.

The principal abusers in this situation are the lesbian mother and perverted bedfellow. Were the MOTHER to repent and turn away from her flagrant and obvious sin, the school's decision would reverse, damn near instantly.

But please--write the Stake in Oregon. Show all of us how this little kid's life will improve with Mormon-sponsored schooling.

After you've gained her admittance to the Mormon school, THEN you can come back and lecture the Catholics.

[ninenot]

see your Catholic priests--anybody who must meet incredibly convoluted requirements to enter a profession, then, once there, need meet virtually no standard of conduct or competence at all to remain within it.

It is apparent that you have a problem with Catholics, which has driven you to make unjustified and uncharitable (not to mention ignorant) attacks on this school--and then you expand it to "Catholic priests" who (in your alleged mind) meet no criteria for remaining priests in good standing.

But still--which LDS school has volunteered to accept this child?

It's also amusing to see you decry "bureaucracy" while being a member of the LDS. Aren't there a few layers emanating from Utah? Or is LDS all 'ad-hoc' administration?

[ninenot]

Robert, I was the initiator of the STFU remark, and it was directed at a queer disruptor, Jorge-Porge, the pudding.

His objective is to trash the Church and those who are not practitioners of the fudge-packing religion.

Perhaps charity impels me to just ignore her, but I'll get around to being shriven...