You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 07, 2016, 02:59:52 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Infuriating Article  (Read 4373 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MacheteTopic starter

Infuriating Article
« on: September 05, 2010, 08:21:16 AM »
I don't give a fuck if the Diocese is within its rights or not, but a lesbian being fired for getting married is goddamned hypocracy

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2010, 09:20:47 AM »
True.. but it's a private Catholic supported school, when the diocese makes the decisions it's pretty much done. Sad though it is, she did violate her contract. (Screwy that...)

Me personally? I find it at the very least galling that you can fire a woman for being a married lesbian but as she points out, all those who use birth control, divorce and whatever (also 'sins' according to the Church) are quietly forgiven. And I find the timing of the announcement very interesting. She's out of a job at the beginning of the school year? With little or no lead time to go looking for a vacancy elsewhere.

That's very charitable and understanding. All in all, what I have come to expect of the Catholic Church. I find it hard to see the church as an organization as a force for good anymore.

Offline Wolfy

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2010, 09:28:15 AM »
True.. but it's a private Catholic supported school, when the diocese makes the decisions it's pretty much done. Sad though it is, she did violate her contract. (Screwy that...)

Me personally? I find it at the very least galling that you can fire a woman for being a married lesbian but as she points out, all those who use birth control, divorce and whatever (also 'sins' according to the Church) are quietly forgiven. And I find the timing of the announcement very interesting. She's out of a job at the beginning of the school year? With little or no lead time to go looking for a vacancy elsewhere.

That's very charitable and understanding. All in all, what I have come to expect of the Catholic Church. I find it hard to see the church as an organization as a force for good anymore.

<_<>_> The Church hasn't been a force of good for a long time. *cough*The Crusades*cough*

Offline Hemingway

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2010, 09:37:41 AM »
Reading this makes me feel a lot of things. Surprise is not one of them.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2010, 10:10:41 AM »
True.. but it's a private Catholic supported school, when the diocese makes the decisions it's pretty much done. Sad though it is, she did violate her contract. (Screwy that...)

Me personally? I find it at the very least galling that you can fire a woman for being a married lesbian but as she points out, all those who use birth control, divorce and whatever (also 'sins' according to the Church) are quietly forgiven. And I find the timing of the announcement very interesting. She's out of a job at the beginning of the school year? With little or no lead time to go looking for a vacancy elsewhere.

That's very charitable and understanding. All in all, what I have come to expect of the Catholic Church. I find it hard to see the church as an organization as a force for good anymore.

The article did say that she had gotten married in August.  It doesn't give an exact date, but the meeting was apparently the first of September (Wednesday).  I don't think that the short lead time can be entirely laid on the diocese. 

My question would be whether or not there is evidence that known divorcees, etc. have been 'quietly forgiven'.  If there are such people, then yes, the diocese is being hypocritical, but what if there aren't?  What if there are actually cases where a re-married teacher has been passed over in hiring decisions, or was quietly let go?  Or a male teacher going on medical leave (for a vasectomy - not sure that's actually against the whole birth-control thing, but it was mentioned in the article) and not returning?

Offline MacheteTopic starter

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2010, 10:17:32 AM »
I was getting at the fact that I don't remember hearing that the Church removed any of the accused child molesters, whether they abused boys or girls, during the sexual abuse scandal.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2010, 10:21:33 AM »
Not to mention the Churches long history of bloodshed, persecution, hatred to others (pagans, heretics, supposed witches), genocide and supporting war against other faiths none of which Jesus said was ok. And seeking worldly power and wealth becoming what amount to a guilded harlot just look at the Vatican is that what Jesus would have wanted?  ???

And I won't get into a more recent scandal with clergy and some parties that were innocent and that was covered up all the way up to the Holy See.

Anyway they had the right to fire her its seperation of church and state I must respect that at least as a member of the clergy lthough in the ULC we are flexible.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2010, 11:23:04 AM »
Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry vs. The Catholic Church
<for the sake of space I took the rest out, you can follow it from the first one>

Stephen Fry makes some pointed commentary towards what some of the things that make me regard the Catholic Church as an organization which has lost it's way. (at least the leadership).

Ironically I think that the average devout Catholic has long been ignored and marginalized by their leadership. They have little or no say in the policies of the church, and of all the major christian faiths they seem to have the least input on policies, changes and how their church functions.

I might not agree with the policies of the fair I was raised in (Anglican/Presbyterian) but there is input among the lay folk. 
« Last Edit: September 05, 2010, 11:46:48 AM by Callie Del Noire »

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2010, 11:51:02 AM »
if they want to restore themselves, and the respect the world once had for them, the Cathoic church is going to have to do a lot of restructuring and cracking down.
the cathloic ministers I've met are usually good guys and their congragations are actually a force for good, but I think corruption sets in at the mid levels somewhere, and it's crippled their image. I heard of some groups of ministers starting to wonder about splitting off.
old "Mother Church" has lost moral authority when they became "the harlot of rome" (if you listen to calvinists) sometime during the early rennisance.
and to the list of percicutions, it was a bloody brutal time that the church inherited from the fallen romans, and every warlord used their faith to justify slauthering and trying to carve out a kingdom. so part of it was the bloody times, part that the church was kind of "politics of faith." That jesus would not have wanted, and that in-fact had him percuted and crusified in the first place.
People blame the church for it's brutality, but it's opposition was just as brutal especally in the early middle ages, the Papacy was just more organized, and could throw it's weight behind the warlords it liked.

I'm not painting it as a hero, or as the great power it imagines itself as, I just think they are blamed for all religious brutality in the middle ages, which is actually unfair... most of the time it was the local rulers who actually held their own witch trials.
The crusades were brutal of course, but their brutality cannot be blamed on the church alone, partly the result of a kind of peace in europe, you suddenly had millions of unemployed professional soldiers, knights, and generals. When the Byzantine emperor requested aid against the islamic armies in the east, the Pope used the local sultan's refusal to allow pilgrims in to the holy city as a way to get all those guys with swords out of europe. and hey if they take a few cities for the church... that'd be just fine...
When the man leading the first crusade lost his wife, he suddenly became impoverished, losing all ties to her wealthy family back home. exausted, hungry, overheated, and now dirt poor... but with an army of professional warriors eager and chomping at the bit for battle, what would you do? the brutality he started upon the people of the middle east in taking their wealth and land started a cycle of slaughter on both sides that only ended when Richard and Saladin agreed to end the cycle of slaughter.
see it's far more complex then "the church sent a lot of guys to kill muslims for having another religon"

and let's not forget the inquisition, a blight on the church if ever there was one... though the office of the inquisition was brutal, their real power was whipping crowds up into a frenzy, and using it to attack anyone suspected of heresy.
the worst branch of the inquisiton was the Spanish, this is because when the blood started to rise, the papacy could not stop them. The Spanish Inquisition answered only to the Spanish Crown, the pope actually had no say in their actions. though I'm guessing it would have still been brutal, but they would have stopped much earlier...

nothing is simple...
but Callie is right, they have marganlized their on flock over the years by being involved in such things, and now the scandals the church is 100% guilty

Offline Wolfy

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2010, 12:19:17 PM »
And yet they are going to get a free pass because they are "saving souls". >_>

Psh.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2010, 12:29:25 PM »
And yet they are going to get a free pass because they are "saving souls". >_>

Psh.

Not entirely. Discontent within in the church has been growing over the lack of reform since the first real accusations in the 90s. As Ironwolf hasointed out, talk of breaking with the church has increased greatly. Not to mention the 'get out of jail' dealings have greatly hurt them in traditionally strong areas like Ireland. Reform is needed but too many senior officials at this time are possibly criminally culpable to allow it. As a result the are wringing their hands and trying to ignore the corpse in the closet in hopes it will go away.

Time will tell if the Vatican will grow a spine and start culling the rotten from the faithful. A lot of fences need to be mended to fix the wounds they have let fester for so long.

Offline Noelle

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2010, 01:06:12 AM »
Anyway they had the right to fire her its seperation of church and state I must respect that at least as a member of the clergy lthough in the ULC we are flexible.

How is firing her separation of church and state? If Massachusetts has laws that also include gays in protection against discrimination/termination, this is the church basically giving a finger to that and overruling state law with religious.

I dunno, shouldn't the woman have kind of seen this coming? It doesn't make it any less unfair for her, it seems she was a very prominent leader and was well-loved in the district, but Catholics have never been renowned for their progressive views regarding homosexuals, so it's surprising they'd allow an openly homosexual woman to teach in the first place...Their stance on homosexuals getting married should've been a no-brainer.

By all means, if a homosexual wants to practice and become involved Catholicism in particular, that's up to the individual, but it does kind of put you at the mercy of people who may not protect you when it comes down to it. Don't confuse this with victim-blaming -- by all means I sympathize with how disappointed and let down she must feel, but I have a hard time thinking that she couldn't have possibly seen this as a potential outcome of her decision.

Regardless, I hope she's happy with her partner and finds a position better-suited to supporting her marriage.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2010, 01:12:21 AM »
How is firing her separation of church and state? If Massachusetts has laws that also include gays in protection against discrimination/termination, this is the church basically giving a finger to that and overruling state law with religious.

It's the fact that it's not a state-supported school, but a private organization.  In the same sense that the state can't force the church to hire women as priests, a religiously-affiliated school has exemptions on who they put in what positions.

Offline Brandon

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2010, 06:20:26 AM »
She worked there for 12 years total. She had plenty of time to find a different job if she felt the anti-gay sentiment of the catholic church was to much and she had plenty of time to find another job between the day she proposed (or was proposed to) and had the wedding. She signed a contract too meaning there are only 1 of 2 possibilities in my mind. The first is she didnt read the contract and if thats the case then Im sorry but shes an idiot. The first thing anyone learns about contracts is that you read the whole thing, even the little type at the bottom. The second is she is trying to stir up controversy, which I find much more likely. If thats the case I have zero sympathy for her (did anyone not even think that could be possibility?)

Edit: Also I think people missed the point that she had a choice of being fired or resigning. The former can hurt future job searches, the later wont (because you basicly quit). If this was a decision made out of malice she just would have been fired, end of story.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2010, 06:31:36 AM by Brandon »

Offline Noelle

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #14 on: September 06, 2010, 02:27:48 PM »
It's the fact that it's not a state-supported school, but a private organization.  In the same sense that the state can't force the church to hire women as priests, a religiously-affiliated school has exemptions on who they put in what positions.

I see what you mean...I did happen to think of that, but couldn't quite formulate my thoughts (yay late-night posting). No, I agree entirely. A private organization is allowed to be as an elite of a club as they'd like. If they wanted to discriminate against women, people with red hair, and Cthulhu (though this might not be the wisest move D:), so long as the state isn't funding them, I don't see why not.

Offline Jude

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2010, 02:39:37 PM »
By being part of the Catholic School she taught in, she was facilitating children being taught religious dogma as part of their education, and in particular, a religious dogma that preaches against the way she lives her life.  If anyone was being hypocritical here, it was her.  She never should've taken a position within an institution that openly condemns her personal lifestyle.

Having said that, I still feel some sympathy for her, it sucks being fired, especially in this economy, but how did she not see this coming?  I obviously think it's wrong for people to be fired simply because they're homosexual, but she was wrong for supporting an institution that actively works against her interests for personal gain.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2010, 02:41:09 PM by Jude »

Offline kylie

  • Bratty Princess of Twisty, Creeping Secrets. Frilly | Fussy | Framed | Dreamy | Glam | Risky | Sporty | Rapt | Tease | Ironic | Shadowed | Struggling | Whispery | Bespelled
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: Somewhere in the future.
  • Darkly sweet femme for rich & insidious scenarios.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2010, 08:12:46 PM »
         Assuming this school is asking tuition and serving as one of a limited number of state-approved options for educational certification in the area, then I also wonder if they don't count as a business subject to recent laws against discrimination on the basis of orientation.  Particularly if they are claiming eligibility for any sort of federal money or programs.  Either way, I suspect as a school, they can be scrutinized as lying within the education industry.  It isn't the same as say, the Boy Scouts, who have gained a certain judicial protection for discrimination.  Has this school sort of case even been tested in court, in light of the laws about orientation and employment?

Quote from: Jude
  She never should've taken a position within an institution that openly condemns her personal lifestyle.
         Ultimately, this means accepting a situation where if you are in a political minority, you are forced flee to some particular geographic enclave and live a segregated "community" existence, with only as many professional opportunities as the more "friendly" areas can provide. 

        One can say always people didn't work hard enough to get "out" of or avoid this or that unsympathetic organization.  That sort of argument can be extended until we reach the point where everyone should burn themselves at birth, rather than "allow" themselves to become a victim and/or complicit with abuse on any number of issues.  We're all implicated in the culture we are in, every little organization and issue that ties to all the others.  Most groups aren't so perfect and oppress people in some ways.  At some point, people have to take a stand from within the groups they have, or nothing changes at all. 

       Simply saying that one should avoid a given situation also ignores all of the good that people have tried to do through otherwise flawed communities.  It doesn't consider how limited their overall choices often are regarding where to work and how.  I'd really question how you can draw a clean line between personal issues and political action.  For lesbian women in the church, try substituting simply women in the US.  American women are well enough aware that they generally receive lower pay, and are frequently attacked or assaulted.  American society keeps on with this, much as the Catholic Church has kept on marginalizing women generally and now gays/lesbians in particular.    So, rather than remain scattered across an abusive society, should American women all flee to a few states with the most favorable laws for them, or seek asylum abroad?  Or should they challenge that culture by example -- even at the risk of further discrimination and suffering?  For that matter...  If the Catholic Church has a noteworthy problem of child abuse, does that mean all of the conscientious priests should give up the whole institution and those selective jobs they have worked endlessly to attain, as soon as they become aware of the scandal? 
« Last Edit: September 07, 2010, 08:20:25 PM by kylie »

Offline Imogen

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #17 on: September 08, 2010, 09:55:07 AM »
I don't see any hypocrisy or fail in the decision to let this teacher go based on the merits of this case alone.

Of course, we can drag in world politics. We can point at the abuse of young boys by Catholics, we can shout "Go Gay Marriage" and wave banners. We can bring in a thousand wrong doings and claim the Church consists of a bunch of hypocrites and cheer at this new example of prejudice, but in the end this employee was subject to a contract she has signed - assumingly - of her own free will.

I find it extremely naive to believe she would be exempt from consequences simply because she has worked there for twelve years. To my best knowledge, no amount of years of employment can give you any right to break a contract onesidedly.

If, and this is an IF that is printed in big, fat letters, there are other proven cases where the board has turned a blind eye towards other transgressors, then I agree with hypocrisy on the part of those who made the decision. But, I also do believe that tolerance should be invited, helped along and given a chance. Do I believe that gay people should have the right to marry? Absolutely. Do I think it is the smart thing to do when working for an institution that abhors that kind of thing? She has every right to flaunt her right to marry in the Institution's face. To believe that doing so would not meet with consequences ranges in my book from naive to outright dumb.

Offline kylie

  • Bratty Princess of Twisty, Creeping Secrets. Frilly | Fussy | Framed | Dreamy | Glam | Risky | Sporty | Rapt | Tease | Ironic | Shadowed | Struggling | Whispery | Bespelled
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: Somewhere in the future.
  • Darkly sweet femme for rich & insidious scenarios.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2010, 04:11:35 PM »
(Not necessarily assuming Imogen identifies as conservative - but I see a certain consistency in the rhetoric here.)

Conservatives are always talking about these supposedly 'obvious' consequences... 
As if the only "consequences" that matter -- the only ones we should notice -- are the ones that keep people within the lines one approves of.

          Well, there is more than one way to play that game.  There can be negative consequences of not tolerating gay marriage.  For instance, the law against employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation also provides for consequences.

          So, such outcomes are only as "natural" as your premises.


Offline Kurzyk

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #19 on: September 10, 2010, 04:22:31 PM »
I don't give a fuck if the Diocese is within its rights or not, but a lesbian being fired for getting married is goddamned hypocracy

That school is a private organization that does not condone or support gay marriage. When one of their staff does, it's within their rights, no matter how much we may agree or disagree with it, to terminate them. That is not hypocrisy.

It's only hypocrisy if her allegations that others are doing so with impunity is true. Policies regarding termination, in any business, should be consistent for all employees.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2010, 05:06:32 PM by Kurzyk »

Offline Imogen

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #20 on: September 10, 2010, 04:45:44 PM »
I am not too fond of being attacked on a personal level on basis of a post. Not even when it is posted between brackets.

That said, I strongly believe there is a huge difference between "being right" and exercising common sense in another's reaction to executing those rights. Having worked for the school for twelve years, one would think this teacher would had had ample time to familiarize herself with its policy. Unfortunately, the article contains very little in the way of actual information, but as far as I can make out from the content as given, this teacher commited a breach of contract. From a legal point of view, the school has acted within its rights.

I would fully agree to the hypocrisy part IF the teacher's accusations towards the school about treating her different from her fellow teachers (divorcees, etc.) are indeed true. Unfortunately, the article doesn't provide further information about this angle and as such, it's anyone's guess what the school's stance has been in other cases. I'm not too keen on immediately accepting a recently fired and angry teacher's accusations as gospel.

Offline Scribbles

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #21 on: September 10, 2010, 08:57:25 PM »
I just wanted to point out that the hypocrisy is apparently based on the notion that others have committed acts which are against the rules but weren't terminated, or punished.

That said, I hope her qualifications or abilities were brought into question more than something as inane as marriage.

Offline Noelle

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #22 on: September 10, 2010, 09:17:27 PM »
It's not really that hypocritical if those other acts weren't a breach of contract -- as it has been mentioned, if it can be proven that she was treated differently compared to others who have made breaches of contract, then she'd have a perfectly legitimate case. It's really not that inane when you're working for an organization who openly condemns your lifestyle and believes it's going to send you to hell.

Offline Scribbles

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #23 on: September 10, 2010, 09:27:57 PM »
Oh, I'm very sure it's not inane to them.

However, I meant for me, personally, it's inane. I'd rather have my child taught by a teacher picked for their ability, experience, etc, than one picked because they didn't marry the wrong gender, race, etc.

Offline Jaybee

Re: Infuriating Article
« Reply #24 on: September 12, 2010, 06:17:48 AM »
I don't give a fuck if the Diocese is within its rights or not, but a lesbian being fired for getting married is goddamned hypocracy

The only possible "goddamned" part about it is this teacher's post-mortem fate (though it's an extremely small possibility, given that she has likely accepted Christ).  Furthermore, she was employed by a church; just why are you infuriated or surprised at this outcome?  It's not like she was the Head of Equities at JP Morgan.