Halton Catholic schools ban gay-straight alliance groups

Do you feel the same way about observant Muslims and Jews as well or is it just Catholics who can't be tolerated and need to be "torn down", as Unionist put it? If you disagree with the beliefs of any religion, fine. Don't be a part of it. If you really enjoy eating ham and cheese sandwiches and going to movies on Friday nights, maybe orthodox Judaism isn't for you. If you really love to eat bacon and drink beer, maybe pick a faith other than Islam or no faith at all. It just seems a bit strange to consciously choose to be part of an Islamic community and then complain about the lack of bacon and beer.

Not being part of any of them shouldn't be the extent of ones opposition, because they still insist on imposing their collective absurdities everywhere. Intolerance from any quarter simply shouldn't be tolerated in any self respecting society. If they wish to continue operating out of the gaps between modern reasoning and comportment in this fashion, they can't then reasonably expect to be extended the benefit of kindly exchanges when they've been so cavalier with their own dignity.

Ahh, the lesser bigots argument.  There is no singling out going on here at all.  This is a story and commentary about one particular institution of bigotry among many others.  Each of them has enough material I'm afraid for their very own threads.  You don't know what you are talking about in relation to the years of discussion about religion on this board, and I suspect you have no interest whatsoever in finding out what is actually going on here.

Liar - no one said that - you're a provocateur.

Liar - your statements are anti-semitic and Islamophobic. There is no Jewish Pope and no Muslim Pope. And most Catholics don't listen to their so-called Pope when he says not to use birth control or divorce or have extra-marital sex or the rest.

You're a provocateur, attempting to suck people here into attacking Jews or Muslims or Catholics. That can't happen, because we are leftists and progressives who are on the side of people - and against hateful ruling elites and ideologies (you know, your kind) that divide and destroy ordinary people.

Baiter - provocateur. You are a bigot. Not people who believe in Judaism or Islam. Just you.

Any "school" that violates the Charter or human rights legislation should be deprived of the ability to issue recognized educational certificates (high school, etc.). Then they can carry on their filthy activities in private. In Québec, when schools refuse to teach anything but creationism, or when they preach homophobia, or refuse to follow the syllabus on sex ed for "religious" reasons, they are deprived of official recognition - and underage kids must additionally attend real schools.

No. But just try and run a business or rent out lodging or commercial space or hire employees on the basis of your "sacred beliefs" - e.g. excluding queers. You will be forced by law to act properly. To make an exception in a public school where our children are sent is obscene. I'm quite sure a legal challenge will succeed with very little effort.

You're a baiter and provocateur. The only ones being bashed here are the Halton school authorities, their mentors in Rome, and you. And if, as you imply, you deliberately send your kids to a school that upholds homophobic beliefs and discriminatory practices, then one need ask what brought you to this discussion board of caring and passionate believers in human and social progress.

The basic issue seems to be "Do organizations which receive public funds have the right to discriminate  on the basis of religious doctrine in contravention of human rights legislation?" The answer should be a resounding "Hell, no!!!"

That's one issue. Another is, even a private school that receives no public funding ought not to be recognized as fulfilling provincial certification requirements if it doesn't abide by human rights legislation and any other minimal standards set by the ministry of education. It should be free to operate as a private club, or school, or whatever - but it should have no more power to issue a high-school certificate than the local Ku Klux Klan chapter. And kids should be required to attend real schools (under provincial truancy requirements) even if their parents choose to additionally send them to Sunday School for Bigots, or whatever.

 

I tend to agree. And I don't want them to get funding. But it seems a bit contradictory to say that you're going to fund "Catholic education" and then prohibit them from exercising Catholic values.

Dodger, you are off topic, and trolling this thread. I don't know what you're on about in this thread, but this thread is not about Jewish schools or faith-based schools in general. It is about the homophobic actions of a school board. And any further mealy-mouthed attempts to justify bigotry and homophobia by dressing it up in the language of religious freedom and tolerance will be met with ridicule and contempt. We don't play those sophist games here.

In fact, don't post in this thread again.

 

Yes,  and I will voluntarily remove myself from this "discussion" in order to keep the peace. It looks like I have no choice in the matter. For the record though I disagree with quite a lot of what a certain poster typically says about Catholics in general. And keep in mind that several of these anti-Catholics who say we can't afford separate school funding will typically contradict that view when they suggest that provincial governments could fully fund post-secondary education and daycare if they really wanted to and especially small prairie provinces governed by the NDP. And alternately they tend to pull out all the stops when it comes to their personal recommendation that separate schools are a luxury cash-strapped provinces can't afford. They are not very consistent for some reason.

Fidel, your defensiveness tells me that you are probably Catholic. Maybe look beyond the personal for a minute and consider that the Catholic Church is an institution. I have no problem with people believing whatever they want, I have a problem with the Church that pushes its sexist, homophobic, anti-revolution politics on the world. One way that the Church does this in Ontario is publicly funded Catholic schools. No matter what you personally feel or believe Catholic schools in Ontario preach hate towards queer people. It's ironic that you dropped the Niemoller quote because they also are rabidly anti-communist and anti-revolutionary (social justice is ok, but only through charity). Obviously public schools are not usually hot beds of revolutionary politics either and there are many that are very homophobic (why else would students need GSAs?). The difference is that Catholic schools, when combating people's human rights, use Pope Law. As someone who relentlesly holds the "stoogocrats'" feet to the fire for administering this "Northern Puerto Rico" i find it very odd that you accept curriculum being set by a non-democratic theocracy in Europe. I fully agree that we should eliminate Catholic schools in Ontario and not because we can't afford them economically. They are a colonial abomination that keeps people oppressed. You should really look deeply into why you support the Church and equate critique of the institution with an attack on Catholic believers.

I'm not sure what universe you're living in.

Did you read the link in the OP?

It's comforting that your Catholic Church doesn't beat up queers, nor burn them at the stake. That's good enough progress for this century, I think. Maybe after 2200 they'll give up on looking for a cure. Maybe by 2300 they'll let them teach. Or maybe God, in His heterosexual mercy, will have dismantled this evil edifice brick by brick before the century is out. Let us prey.

@Keystone:

Well, how about this gem from January 6, 2005 (a pastoral letter read out in all the parishes of the diocese under the supervision of Bishop Fred Henry, Bishop of Calgary):

[emphasis added]

Would you be so kind as to come up with a plausible explanation of this being anything other than a call for a return to criminalization of homosexuality as was the case in this country prior to 1969? A call for the state to return to using its "coercive power to proscribe" is pretty much a call for arrest and imprisonment - a pretty clear use of force against, oh what is that cute term, the suspect class. Of course, in the Bishop Henry model, force/violence would be used by the authorized agencies of the crown rather than vigilante goons... big consolation, not.

 

 

 

Well, it's obviously not an endorsement of  homosexuality, but I don't think your interpretation of calling for these activities to be illegal is clear-cut. You think they are calling for adultery to be illegal as well? They are, however, calling for government to actively limit these activiites, and speak out against them.

I don't agree with this, and in terms of Catholic teachings, I think this is more likely to be the exception than the norm, as evidenced by the fact that you had to find something from six years ago.

Now, a fair comparison would be smoking. Goverment actively speaks out against it, and tries to limit it. While it certainly could be described as fear of homosexuality, I think it is innaccurate to decribe this statement as an endorsement for bullying, harassing, or harming gays, just as we don't bully, or harass smokers - even though we try to limit it in Canadian society.