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