Quantcast

Comments about ‘Catholic high school teacher fired after applying for same-sex marriage license’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Dec. 11 2013 6:10 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Lagomorph
Salt Lake City, UT

Article: "...apply for a gay marriage license ...he applied for a same-sex marriage license..."

Unless New Jersey law specifies that a different document be used for same-sex couples than for opposite-sex couples, I question this usage. He did not apply for a gay marriage license or a same-sex marriage license. He applied for a marriage license. He just happens to be planning to marry another man.

The inconsistency in the school's policy is troubling as well. The criticism that the school was fine with an "out" gay man as teacher but only became troubled when he announced marriage plans is spot on and illustrates a bizarre double standard. In most religions, marriage is the ticket that makes intimate relations legit. This concept is echoed in most civil law. It's just odd (and paradoxical) that the school would rather have a teacher live in sin than outside of sin.

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

Legally the Catholic Church can certainly do this. It seems inconsistent to let him "live in sin" but fire him when he marries, but the Church can do that too. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and they can work something out - especially if they have let him work there for that long knowing he was Gay.

Cats
Somewhere in Time, UT

Regardless of if he's living in sin or "married", he is still living in sin. This guy must live on another planet.

DN Subscriber 2
SLC, UT

It is astounding to watch the liberals all demand "tolerance and respect" for "diverse lifestyles" and get all lawsuit happy at any perceived injustice.

However, the show absolutely NO "tolerance and respect" for the deeply held religious values of others.

As Orwell pointed out, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal."

Californian#1@94131
San Francisco, CA

** "Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and they can work something out - especially if they have let him work there for that long knowing he was Gay." **

Knowing he was gay is one thing. Was the school actually aware whether he was cohabiting with his partner, or did they practice DADT? If the latter, perhaps they gave him the benefit of the doubt that he was not living in sin, avoiding a confrontation over his sexual orientation.

But coming out and telling them he was applying to "marry" someone of the same sex... that is a totally different matter. That is not an issue of sexual orientation, but a case of him getting in their faces, making a mockery of the doctrines of his religious employers, knowing what their reacion would be, and maybe setting up a situation for a lawsuit.

A Scientist
Provo, UT

When he was merely known to be gay, there was no official, documented, legally recognized evidence of that "sinful" status. His sinful behavior is only hearsay. But as soon as he formalizes it by a marriage license, the Catholic Church has "actionable" evidence.

The LDS Church is no different. In the LDS Church, that a person is gay merely means they experience "same sex attraction". That status is simply hearsay, and such a person cannot be excommunicated or disfellowshipped on such grounds. But as soon as there is evidence that they have "acted on" that attraction, then they have officially "sinned" and can be disciplined.

This is ecclesiastical legalistic hairsplitting, and no matter how Churches try to spin it, it will backfire on them. There is no rational nor moral basis for religious discrimination against equality and love.

Ranch
Here, UT

I don't know why he told them he was going to get married. He should have just just gotten married and never informed the school of the event.

@Cats;

MYOB. The only "sin" between loving LGBT couples is the one in your mind.

Jamescmeyer
Midwest City, USA, OK

The Catholic Church is an entity with certain rules and beliefs, and if I work for such an entity, I can expect no less than for them to maintain their rules and beliefs.

Merely knowing that a person is homosexual is not grounds to terminate them, simply being such is not a sin for that church; but when looking at marriage in a misunderstood and selfish enough of a view to promote its change (and, at least tacitly, the ills that come with it), then all bets are off.

I doubt many of the people crying "unfair!" would be doing the same if the teacher worked for a school spondered by a social liberal "research" institute, and turned out to support the protection of marriage.

TRUTH
Salt Lake City, UT

Why would one who is gay want to teach at a school where the curriculum is anti gay? I don't blame the school for holding up its values, and blame the teacher for his charade as a anti gay teacher!

Contrariuserer
mid-state, TN

@Jamescmeyer --

"The Catholic Church is an entity with certain rules and beliefs, and if I work for such an entity, I can expect no less than for them to maintain their rules and beliefs."

Then you should expect them to fire EVERYONE who "lives in sin". How many teachers there are cohabitating or otherwise having sex outside of marriage? How many teachers there have ever had an abortion or even used birth control?

They are practicing hypocrisy, not righteousness.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

So, a nurse who happens to be Catholic has the right to tell his/her boss that he/she will not assist with certain procedures - such as abortions - because they violate his/her right of conscience. And the boss, regardless of his or her views, has to let the nurse opt out and cannot require that nurse to participate (unless that nurse is the only one available and it is an emergency situation in which the female patient will/may loose her life) even though assisting in hospital procedures is a major part of the nurse's job description.

And most everyone agrees that the employee should be allowed to live his/her religious principles.

However, if a Christian employee believes in same-sex marriage and wants to marry his/her same gender significant other - even though this has absolutely no bearing on the employee's job - the employer who objects to same-sex marriage has a right to fire that employee because it violates the employer's right of conscience.

Does anyone else find it suspect that "right of conscience" always seems to belong to whichever party has the greatest political backing?

t702
Las Vegas, NV

@ Contrariuserer

" How many teachers there are cohabitating or otherwise having sex outside of marriage? How many teachers there have ever had an abortion or even used birth control?
They are practicing hypocrisy, not righteousness."

I would like to know where did you find the names of these people you mentioned? That is precisely the point, had this teacher leave his private business at home, this wouldn't had happened. The school had no business of knowing what he does in private, he should have left it at that

RedWings
CLEARFIELD, UT

Same-sex attraction and homosexuality are two different things. It is the same as being tempted to sin but not acting on it. The "sin" comes not from being tempted but from giving in to the temptation and acting in rebellion against God. Between "temptation" and "sin" is "choice".

Why would a gay man get a job with the Catholic Church given its teachings? This looks like another set up "test case" the LGBT community uses. I expect to see this pushed into court and a liberal judge to rule for the teacher.

Yet another example of one group being able to trample the rights of another. Welcome to "tolerance" in the 21st century....

Contrariuserer
mid-state, TN

@t702 --

"had this teacher leave his private business at home, this wouldn't had happened. The school had no business of knowing what he does in private, he should have left it at that"

You don't leave your private business at home -- why should he?

Every time you put a photo of your spouse on your desk, you are declaring your orientation.

Every time you tell another teacher that you are going to the movies with your spouse, you are declaring your orientation.

Every time you invite a friend to a baby shower for your pregnant girlfriend, you are not only declaring your orientation but also declaring yourself to be living in sin.

When a divorced woman announces to her fellow teachers that she is getting remarried, she is not only announcing her orientation but also declaring herself to be an adulterer in the eyes of the Catholic church.

Should all of these declarations of free speech be banned?

Would that adulteress or that fornicator be fired by the school?

donn
layton, UT

RE: Contrariuserer,Would that adulteress or that fornicator be fired by the school?

The Holiness Code contained different types of commands. Some were related to dietary regulations or to ceremonial cleanliness, and these have been done away with in the N.T.. (Col. 2:16-17; Rom. 14:1-3). Others, though, were moral codes, and are timeless. Thus incest, child sacrifice, homosexuality, bestiality, adultery, and the like, are still abominations before God.

Elders should be men who are of unquestionable integrity and are irreproachable, the husband of “one wife”, whose children are [well trained and are] believers, not open to the accusation of being loose in morals and conduct or unruly and disorderly. (Titus 1:6 AMP)

Oatmeal
Woods Cross, UT

@Contrariuserer:

If you have signed a contract with a private entity that based your continued employment on set standards, would you march into the management office and announce that you were no longer going to fulfill the obligations of your contract? If you did so, would you then be surprised if you were fired?

This story is not going end well for anyone. Religious entities will be careful about ever employing gays, including talented teachers and professionals, out of fear of a lawsuit. Laws may be passed against the rights of private religious entities, including churches, from setting religious-based standards for employees. And the First Amendment dies...

Contrarius
mid-state, TN

@donn --

"The Holiness Code contained different types of commands. "

Adultery and fornication ARE moral codes.

I'll repeat my question:

Would the adulteress or fornicator be fired?

@Oatmeal --

"would you march into the management office and announce that you were no longer going to fulfill the obligations of your contract? "

Would you rather have him lie?

I'll ask you the same question: would the adulteress or fornicator be fired?

"And the First Amendment dies..."

What about the First Amendment rights of the teacher?

@Redwings --

"This looks like another set up "test case" the LGBT community uses."

Baloney.

College soccer coach -- Nashville -- fired in 2010 after she told her team that her female partner was pregnant.

Legislative editor of the Georgia General Assembly -- fired in 2005 when she told her boss that she was transsexual and was going to begin dressing/presenting as a woman.

Professor -- Wisconsin -- offered a job as a university dean in 2010. When that university found out she was a lesbian, the offer was rescinded.

Schoolteacher -- Minnesota -- fired in 2013 after acknowledging that she's a lesbian. At the same school, the school president resigned just a few months earlier after he acknowledged having an 18-year relationship with another man.

Kirk R Graves
West Jordan, UT

@Ranch
"MYOB. The only "sin" between loving LGBT couples is the one in your mind."

If there is a God, then sin is an absolute, not an opinion.

What constitutes sin in God's mind is an opinion for each person, but they must base that opinion on the information they have. The Bible states that homosexuality is a sin. The Quran says the same thing. Between those 2 books you have covered better than 50% of the world's population. So, the only real question here is "Does God Exist?". Since I have proof that he does (that proof may only be of value to me, but it is still proof), and you have no proof that he doesn't exist (since it is impossible to prove the negative); therefor, making the claim that homosexuality is a sin is not just in the mind, but based on logical, deductive reasoning.

Contrarius
mid-state, TN

@Kirk --

"If there is a God, then sin is an absolute, not an opinion. "

Who says? Maybe God believes in moral relativity. Perhaps it is only your personal view of God that insists on absolutism.

"So, the only real question here is "Does God Exist?". "

Nope. The other question is "If God does exist, how can I presume to know its mind?"

Religions disagree widely on many very important principles -- yet they all believe themselves to be correct interpretations of God's will (or gods' wills). They can't all be correct.

And, btw -- many Christians already support gay marriage.

Kirk R Graves
West Jordan, UT

@Contrarius,

Moral Relativism - The philosophical doctrine that good and evil are defined by the individual.

First, there are only 2 scenarios where God could be a moral relativist.

1. He defines what is good and evil based on a personal metric of harm and the higher understanding he has. In this scenario, we would be stupid to believe we know better than He, so we are back to moral absolutism.

2. He knows what is best for us, but doesn't share it with us because he enjoys watching us suffer. We must reject this idea of God as it is opposite of the definition of God, but fills the definition of Satan or Devil instead. Thus, if there is a God, we are back to the first option and we must accept Moral Absolutism.

Second, the question is not whether or not Christians support SS marriage, the question is whether or not Christianity supports SS marriage. While it is possible to wrest the scriptures to convince one's self that homosexuality is morally acceptable, it is not in conformance with scriptural teachings.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments