Silencing Information January 25. 2005
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Wow David. That is. Just. Wow. I loved my time there, but am so glad to be gone. It saddens me the way that they are attempting to handle this, what really should be a non-issue. I also know Bishop Higi personally, from my youth, and I genuinely liked the man. However, his actions have not been positive over the course of the last 10 years, for the Diocese in general (there were a number of issues relating to youth ministry that I think he royally messed upt (as I grew up in the Diocese and used to be quite active in youth ministry)).
I hope that the school doesn't make the mistake they have looming on the horizon and potentially loose some very talented educators. This kind of issue, with much of the faculty I think, could be decisive enough to fatally mar the embattled college. I remember the trouble Chris Campbell had just trying to got sexual orientation added to the anti-discrimination policy for students 4 years ago. It wasn't the students that fought against that policy, but the Board of Trustees.
*eyeroll*
I hope that the school doesn't make the mistake they have looming on the horizon and potentially loose some very talented educators. This kind of issue, with much of the faculty I think, could be decisive enough to fatally mar the embattled college. I remember the trouble Chris Campbell had just trying to got sexual orientation added to the anti-discrimination policy for students 4 years ago. It wasn't the students that fought against that policy, but the Board of Trustees.
*eyeroll*
I agree that it's discriminatory to fire somebody based soley on their sexual orientation, insofar as it is a *trait* that is part of an individuals physiological makeup. As an exercise at looking at an issue from both sides, I'd ask the question, "assuming the diocese & CPPS have good intentions, why are those intentions coming out so discriminatory, and how can they be better implemented?"
I'd think that their real problem lies in the the muddling of sexual orientation versus sexual lifestyle (read: homosexuality versus homosexual lifestyle). In not disinguishing the two, they're being blatantly discriminatory. IMHO.
I'd think that their real problem lies in the the muddling of sexual orientation versus sexual lifestyle (read: homosexuality versus homosexual lifestyle). In not disinguishing the two, they're being blatantly discriminatory. IMHO.
That's what floored me about the silencing. I know Bishop Higi and Fr. Angelo (very slightly) and they do seem like nice guys. I think it has more to do with keeping the status quo and not wanting to be embroiled in a controversy with Rome. Unfortunately, I think they need to learn from the mistakes of larger institutions who have already been through this (like Notre Dame) and have caused much turmoil within the institution.
I cannot think of any good reason to silence people though.. it baffles me.
I cannot think of any good reason to silence people though.. it baffles me.
So do they really think that this policy will hold up in a court of law?

