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.

[ninenot]

We await the moment when ChemistCat announces that the LDS school in Oregon has accepted the child. And we wait, and wait, and...

[Conservative til I die]

I await the moment when ChemistCat public apologizes for saying that the child molestation scandal in the Church is not an aberration. Sick-o.

[saradippity]

there's no hard,universal rule on who gets admitted to Catholic school"

Yes,I heard that the late Cardinal O'Conner,believed that education in Catholic schools was superior and that the key to improving the lot of minorities was to give them the benefit of a Catholic education.Since most of them could not afford it,Catholics from all over the nation were solicited to help him maintain the schools and offer the oppurtunity to those who were not Catholic and could not afford tuition.

I know I always responded to his letters and sent donations because I did think he was right,and as a Successor of the Apostles,in a local Church,he was using the prerogative he possessed to "go out and baptize and teach all nations what I have commanded you".In his fulfilling this mission in his local diocese of the Roman Catholic Church,he put the finances of the church in NY in a bad way.But I know that God will take care of things.With the huge problems with the "government school" education in New York,he was right to promote a superior education for minorities.

The situation in Oregon with the "two mommies" is so totally different,there it is merely,getting the camel's nose under the tent,and if I were a Catholic in Oregon I would certainly let the school know how very much their stand is appreciated.

[TheCrusader]

The "mothers" will not be attending the school, however. If the little girl qualifies for admission otherwise, and of course it is possible that she does not--but if she does, I have to wonder what SHE has done to be denied your church's educational opportunities."

The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual acts are unnatural, sinful and evil, so a Catholic school is not a suitable place for the "daughter" of two avowed homosexual perverts to get her education. One must ask the question of why these two lesbians would want to bring their daughter to a school that they know will teach the child that her parents are "intrinsicly disordered", (sinful and perverted)? Don't they care about this girl's feelings? The whole thing stinks of a setup, with the poor little girl being used as the human bait. This reveals just how evil these two lesbian perverts are.

Public schools cater to the needs of homosexual perverts and their families, let them take this poor child there. If you feel badly for this child, as I do, you need to go to the origin of this child's problem, namely, her being raised by two perverted women who cannot by God's design bring forth a child as a result of their lesbian sexual activity. My heart breaks for this little girl that they use as bait.

[ChemistCat]

Bureaucracy is the bane of **all** organizations, for it blunts the good impulse with procedure, butt-covering, and overconcern for ladder-climbing, and makes it easy for the dishonest to cover their tracks by networking within the system. I never said that wasn't true of my church. I do have to add, however, that my church has learned the lesson yours is still struggling to learn--coverups ALWAYS backfire. We remove and excommunicate those who abuse children--or we do, when the organization does not fail, as organizations will tend to do. A broad, worldwide scandal such as your church has suffered is not going to happen to us because we have no paid clergy.

I stand behind my theory of organization, and the negative effects of high barriers and low standards. This is a theory of Thomas Sowell's and it explains much of what goes wrong with organizations everywhere, whether they are teacher's unions, political parties, or churches. Think it's Catholic-bashing? Too bad. I never said it applies only to you or that it means all CAtholics are corrupt. It does mean that the organization tends to protect its own. Prove otherwise, if you can. Please show me a case in which your system worked properly from the get-go.

I have absolutely never said that most priests are abusers and that is a straw man you folks have constructed of my argument. What I do say is that you do not have any methods in place to eliminate those who abuse the privileges they have earned. Your system protects them and allows them to continue their abuses for decades. I'm sorry to say this but this is proven by events.

My church does not have an organized system of private schools, and so the issue of admitting this child to our private school does not exist. It would be a nice solution, and many of us long for it, but again, we tend to insularity anyway and it would probably be unhealthy for our faith, or we would have them.

We do not refuse anyone admission to our worship services. We have high standards for admission to our temples, but *anyone* may meet those standards as they are standards of conduct, not standards of education or licensing of any sort.

[ninenot]

we tend to insularity anyway and it would probably be unhealthy for our faith, or we would have them.

So, since the LDS does not operate schools because "it would be unhealthy for our faith," you are pleased to insult and calumniate Catholics who operate schools and who refuse admittance to ACTIVELY PRACTICING lesbo-perverts' children?

Those women are using that little girl like they would use a Kleenex--or a refrigerator. The poor little kid is a possession, a means to some ends for them.

Maybe you should suggest that YOUR Lutheran school take the child--and relocate the parent(?)s to OKC. Sounds like the perfect solution, as long as the LDS would endanger their faith by operating schools.

[ninenot]

Tom Sowell is an excellent writer, a very good thinker, and a provocative economic theoretician.

But Tom Sowell NEVER (legitimately) applied his theories to the Church--nor would he dare. He knows that's a bit past his pay grade.

The Roman Catholic Church is not an organization; it is the Body of Christ in the world. Its members, humans, are subject to the same effects of Original Sin as are you and I, and Tom Sowell...

Thus, while the Church has a human structure and a system of governance akin to other human enterprises, Her true Governor is Christ, through His Vicar, the Pope.

And since Christ IS Life, "organizational entropy" theories simply do not apply.

Nice try, though. If you get Sowell to positively affirm that he refers to the Church's structure with his theory, we'd love to see his letter to that effect.

Now get that "family" down to OKC and into your children's classroom...

[saradippity]

If you read my post #143,you will get a better idea of how the Catholic education system functions and who is responsible for it. There you will see that Cardinal O'Conner,reacting to the larger community needs,tried to open the education system at no expense to minorities. He had the authority to make that determination. Part of a CAtholic education includes teaching the truths of the Church vis-a-vis morals and faith,parents were willing to accept that if that was part of what constituted a Catholic education.The situation in New York had different priorities and different objectives.

The Oregon case is totally different,one shoe does not fit all,you know.Since so many people believe truth is relative,including most members of the "progressive"community to which active homosexuals belong,it is only prudent and charitable to deny admission to the children of persons who hold in contempt Church teaching on faith and morals.To immerse a young child,on a daily basis,to a culture that is contrary to the culture the child's family espouses is cruel and dangerous. In fact,it is bound to create great confusion,and we all know who uses that tool quite adroitly,don't we? Four is far too young to be confronted with two kind of "lifelocking" choices.

[Last Dakotan]

I agree with you completely, and share your anger.

[Terriergal]

Boy reminds me of the lady whose daughter was kicked out because the mom was an exotic dancer.

[ChemistCat]

I think that one would bring her daughter to school in supershort skirts and a thong, or was it not even a thong? At any rate she behaved badly and flaunted her activities despite being asked to stop. I cant' remember if she won the lawsuit or not. Hope not.

[OpusatFR]

"We do not refuse anyone admission to our worship services."

Neither do we. But Catholics have a firm understanding of repentence.

"I think we have become so (cruel) in the attempt to reduce all virtues to kindness. For Plato rightly taught that the virtue is one. You cannot be kind unless you have all the other virtues. If, being cowardly, conceited, slothful, you have never yet done a fellow creature great mischief, that is only because your neighbour's welfare has not yet happened to conflict with your safety, self-approval, or ease.

Every vice leads to cruelty. Even a good emotion, pity, if not controlled by charity and justice, leads through anger to cruelty."

C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain

It isn't that we punish the child. It is that there are demands other than kindness. What good would it do the child if, being told her mother is in a morally untenable position, she either hates her mother, or the Church. Further, the mother is in direct opposition to the Church itself. Using the child to further her political agenda is so damaging and depraved that one cannot help but wonder if she views the child as merely an extension of herself.

[Jorge]

Do you want government officials to remedy the situation?

No. The Catholic school system has the right to make their own decisions without interference from Govt.
But I still think they've made the wrong decision on this.

[Jorge]

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

Look ma! Another poster who would rather make baseless accusations than actually address the position of poster he disagrees with!

You can't show me anything "anti-Catholic" about my posts.
For all you know I am a Catholic.

I disagree with the decision made by the administrator of this particular Catholic school.
Are you saying this decision in fact represents the policy of then entire Catholic Church? That the Church rejects any kids who's parents lifestyly happens to include sin? Incredible.

For one who pressumes to be defending the Catholic Church, funny you've been unable to offer a single argument supporting their position.

[OpusatFR]

The child begins instruction at six. At seven she makes her first confession and receives Communion.

Do you ask her, at that age, to assess her mother's and her companion's relationship in juxtaposition to the Church's teachings? And at seven, the child has seen them react to each other as lovers.

How does this child reconcile the teachings against impurity with what she witnesses? How does the mother explain to the child that she does not believe that Church is the arbiter of morality and is wrong in its teachings about purity and fornication? Then, how does the mother continue to send the child to instruction that conflicts with Church teaching.

The child needs to go to a public school. The mother needs to stop using her child as a political pawn. That in itself is a grave issue. Her website is quite enlightening.

[OpusatFR]

BTW, the nuns had no problem at all telling children about ~that mother of yours~ when confronted by varying degrees of bad behavior on the part of parents.

It usually served as a corrective measure.

Will this woman take such correction?

[GirlShortstop]

You can't show me anything "anti-Catholic" about my posts.

You Jorge are first and foremost pro-homosexual.   You remain so regardless of TRUTH presenting itself; "I'll call you names!" is your m.o. in support of the agenda.   You were asked to clarify and substantiate your position in this matter (the lesbians are right, the Catholics are wrong), and time, and time again, (you can or can not read the question?) you danced.  By choosing such a tact, you are blowing smoke, and have revealed your Anti-Catholic sentiments.  That's basic; it is a common sense deduction from which you can not slither away.

For all you know I am a Catholic.

Are you too cowardly to state your faith?  Guess you're about as Catholic as Luther.

Jorge says:  I disagree with the decision made by the administrator of this particular Catholic school.    AKA:

The idea that these kids should be banned like poison from school because some holy roller hypocrites want to punish them for their parent's shortcomings is mean spirited, short sighted and a poor Christian testimony.

Laughibly, that was supposed to be a response to my question at post 88:       Perhaps if you'd like to "side with" the lesbians, you can offer a reason why these two would *want* to foist a Catholic education on the child?  <snip>

Read on Jorge, there is much more that has escaped you:

post 145 by TheCrusader:
The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual acts are unnatural, sinful and evil, so a Catholic school is not a suitable place for the "daughter" of two avowed homosexual perverts to get her education. One must ask the question of why these two lesbians would want to bring their daughter to a school that they know will teach the child that her parents are "intrinsicly disordered", (sinful and perverted)? Don't they care about this girl's feelings? The whole thing stinks of a setup, with the poor little girl being used as the human bait. This reveals just how evil these two lesbian perverts are.

post 147 by ninenot:
Those women are using that little girl like they would use a Kleenex--or a refrigerator. The poor little kid is a possession, a means to some ends for them.

post 149 by saradippity:
Since so many people believe truth is relative,including most members of the "progressive" community to which active homosexuals belong,it is only prudent and charitable to deny admission to the children of persons who hold in contempt Church teaching on faith and morals.  To immerse a young child,on a daily basis,to a culture that is contrary to the culture the child's family espouses is cruel and dangerous. In fact,it is bound to create great confusion,and we all know who uses that tool quite adroitly, don't we?

post 153 by OpusatFR:

"I think we have become so (cruel) in the attempt to reduce all virtues to kindness. For Plato rightly taught that the virtue is one. You cannot be kind unless you have all the other virtues. If, being cowardly, conceited, slothful, you have never yet done a fellow creature great mischief, that is only because your neighbour's welfare has not yet happened to conflict with your safety, self-approval, or ease.
Every vice leads to cruelty. Even a good emotion, pity, if not controlled by charity and justice, leads through anger to cruelty."     C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain

[ninenot]

Gosh, you do a lot of work before noon.

[ChemistCat]

Reminds me of "They like having their own schools. They're happier that way. That way they don't know any different."