Private Schools and Society

[JoeyKnothead]

From the article here:

The firing of a gay physical-education teacher from a Columbus Catholic high school would be a violation of a city ordinance if a complaint were filed and investigators determined the dismissal was based on her sexual orientation.

Carla Hale of Powell, who worked at Bishop Watterson High School in Clintonville for 19 years, said she was fired in March after an anonymous parent complained that an obituary for Hale’s mother listed the name of Hale’s female domestic partner.

^my link to what is assumed to be the school in question.

On the one hand, why would a gay person ostensibly seek to encourage a Catholic education, when at least this bunch of Catholics are so against homosexuals? Then we have the issue of a possible violation of a city ordinance conflicting with the idea that religious schools be allowed a certain latitude as relates to their religious convictions.


For debate:

Which is the greater harm (or good); allowing religious schools to fire folks over their sexual preferences, or to hold that all who are shown capable should be allowed to work (where we 'decide' this school is a part of the city as a whole)? I assume this is a privately funded school, but still contend society has a right to make certain decisions in this regard.

I propose the greater good is in allowing this woman, who hasn't been accused of anything within the school setting, to be allowed to continue to teach. But what does that say about allowing folks to practice their beliefs as they see fit? I'm lost as a cow at a square dance.

[100%atheist]

From the article here:

The firing of a gay physical-education teacher from a Columbus Catholic high school would be a violation of a city ordinance if a complaint were filed and investigators determined the dismissal was based on her sexual orientation.

Carla Hale of Powell, who worked at Bishop Watterson High School in Clintonville for 19 years, said she was fired in March after an anonymous parent complained that an obituary for Hale’s mother listed the name of Hale’s female domestic partner.

^my link to what is assumed to be the school in question.

On the one hand, why would a gay person ostensibly seek to encourage a Catholic education, when at least this bunch of Catholics are so against homosexuals? Then we have the issue of a possible violation of a city ordinance conflicting with the idea that religious schools be allowed a certain latitude as relates to their religious convictions.


For debate:

Which is the greater harm (or good); allowing religious schools to fire folks over their sexual preferences, or to hold that all who are shown capable should be allowed to work (where we 'decide' this school is a part of the city as a whole)? I assume this is a privately funded school, but still contend society has a right to make certain decisions in this regard.

I propose the greater good is in allowing this woman, who hasn't been accused of anything within the school setting, to be allowed to continue to teach. But what does that say about allowing folks to practice their beliefs as they see fit? I'm lost as a cow at a square dance.

I think that private businesses should allow to discriminate. But then, in order to properly advertise them selves, they have to state clear that they are discriminating. Also, I think the government can make it economically preferred for businesses not to discriminate by imposing discrimination taxes.

[marketandchurch]

Society should have no right to influence who a private school deems appropriate to teach its students. Whether its an art school, or a KKK-sponsored white's only charter school, a private school's business is its own.

That said, I support the employment of homosexuals in every facet of life, but I have reservations about k-12 employment, and any form of employment that has children as its focus. In our value-free education system, it is important for homosexuals to stay in the closet vis-a-vis their orientation, or choose another form of employment.

In the ideal world, the sexuality of a person would not matter because both heterosexuals and homosexuals would vocally espouse the societal ideal, of male-female marriage, and male-female love, and heterosexuals loved their homosexual counterpart as equals, as they too are made in the image of God. But we don't live in that world. We live in one where one side champions traditional marriage but doesn't know how to make its case for it, and the other side wants to destroy marriage as an institution, and destroy gender as well.

[help3434]

Society should have no right to influence who a private school deems appropriate to teach its students. Whether its an art school, or a KKK-sponsored white's only charter school, a private school's business is its own.

Well, if a society is going to make education up to a certain age legally mandatory, it is only logical that it should set certain standards that even private schools and homeschooling programs would have to meet.

That said, I support the employment of homosexuals in every facet of life, but I have reservations about k-12 employment, and any form of employment that has children as its focus. In our value-free education system, it is important for homosexuals to stay in the closet vis-a-vis their orientation, or choose another form of employment.

Why should homosexuals who work with children have to stay in the closet? Are you one of those people who think that talking or thinking about LGBT issues somehow "corrupts" children?

We live in one where one side champions traditional marriage but doesn't know how to make its case for it, and the other side wants to destroy marriage as an institution, and destroy gender as well.

No, one side wants the institution of marriage to be more inclusive, while the other wants to limit the freedom of consenting adults.

[McCulloch]

Society should have no right to influence who a private school deems appropriate to teach its students. Whether its an art school, or a KKK-sponsored white's only charter school, a private school's business is its own.

Then you may as well give up on any laws about mandatory education. The same government which has decreed that all children are to be educated also has the right to determine what is or is not valid education.

That said, I support the employment of homosexuals in every facet of life, but I have reservations about k-12 employment, and any form of employment that has children as its focus. In our value-free education system, it is important for homosexuals to stay in the closet vis-a-vis their orientation, or choose another form of employment.

Why? Are you afraid that an out of the closet gay teacher is going to corrupt our youth?

In the ideal world, the sexuality of a person would not matter because both heterosexuals and homosexuals would vocally espouse the societal ideal, of male-female marriage, and male-female love, and heterosexuals loved their homosexual counterpart as equals, as they too are made in the image of God. But we don't live in that world.

Your ideal world is one where homosexual couples would deny the validity of their own relationships and only espouse heterosexual marriage?

We live in one where one side champions traditional marriage but doesn't know how to make its case for it, and the other side wants to destroy marriage as an institution, and destroy gender as well.

None of the advocates for same sex marriage want to destroy marriage as an institution. We've had same sex marriage in Canada since January 2001. Heterosexual couples are still getting married; the divorce rate is not substantially rising; there are no indications that marriage as an institution is being destroyed, in fact, I am still happily married to an opposite sex partner and feel no threat to my marriage by the same sex married couple who live a few doors down. Please tell me what do you mean that they want to destroy marriage?

[dianaiad]

Society should have no right to influence who a private school deems appropriate to teach its students. Whether its an art school, or a KKK-sponsored white's only charter school, a private school's business is its own.

Then you may as well give up on any laws about mandatory education. The same government which has decreed that all children are to be educated also has the right to determine what is or is not valid education.

My own opinion on this is that 'mandatory education' should be tested in two ways, and two ways only: testing for minimum acquisition of knowledge (can the kid read, write and figure enough to get through life?) and/or evaluated by the high school/college/employer the kid wants to go to next. Period.

I have a real problem with the government mandating ethical or moral standards in school. Huge.

So to parents who yank their kids out of public schools and put them into private or religious schools which share the values of the parents/families. As well, studies show that private schools (Catholic ones, usually) quite often out perform public schools scholastically...as in, more of those kids go on to college than public school graduates.

Shoot, HOMESCHOOLED kids have a better average of college admissions than public high school graduates. So you can understand why I don't think that the government is all that wonderful at mandating curricula.

If the kid gets a good score on the SAT, does it matter whether she learned how to think critically in Catholic school or Podunk High? In fact, she's more likely to get high SAT scores from the Catholic school than from good ol' Podunk.

The government may mandate THAT children go to school, and it may even set standards for what is learned. However, politically correct as Harvard and Berkeley are, they'll still be more likely to let the Catholic school kid with the 1600 SAT score in before the kid from Twiddledale High with the gay English teacher....and the 650 SAT score.

As well, the Catholic teacher who actually believes the odd stuff that Catholicism teaches about honesty, integrity, and such is more likely to get into college...and graduate from college...without cheating than the student of the teacher who thinks it's just ducky to lie about credentials and life style in order to keep her job.

yeah, yeah.....very odd of me to think that way, but I do.

[McCulloch]

My own opinion on this is that 'mandatory education' should be tested in two ways, and two ways only: testing for minimum acquisition of knowledge (can the kid read, write and figure enough to get through life?) and/or evaluated by the high school/college/employer the kid wants to go to next. Period.

...

If the kid gets a good score on the SAT, does it matter whether she learned how to think critically in Catholic school or Podunk High? In fact, she's more likely to get high SAT scores from the Catholic school than from good ol' Podunk.

But if this is what the science test looks like, they are not learning science.

http://now.msn.com/south-carolina-relig ... reationism

[dianaiad]

My own opinion on this is that 'mandatory education' should be tested in two ways, and two ways only: testing for minimum acquisition of knowledge (can the kid read, write and figure enough to get through life?) and/or evaluated by the high school/college/employer the kid wants to go to next. Period.

...

If the kid gets a good score on the SAT, does it matter whether she learned how to think critically in Catholic school or Podunk High? In fact, she's more likely to get high SAT scores from the Catholic school than from good ol' Podunk.

But if this is what the science test looks like, they are not learning science.

http://now.msn.com/south-carolina-relig ... reationism

Perhaps they are not.

Two things, however. The kid who learns that isn't going to get a decent score on the SAT, and no Catholic kid is going to be taught that. Just so you know.

[help3434]

[Replying to post 26 by dianaiad]

Tests like the ACT and SAT don't test science knowledge they test reading comprehension, math skills, and writing (The 3 R's).

[dianaiad]

[Replying to post 26 by dianaiad]

Tests like the ACT and SAT don't test science knowledge they test reading comprehension, math skills, and writing (The 3 R's).

If you think that, you haven't been reading the articles they put in there in ORDER to test reading comprehension, math skills and writing.

[Clownboat]

Society should have no right to influence who a private school deems appropriate to teach its students. Whether its an art school, or a KKK-sponsored white's only charter school, a private school's business is its own.

That said, I support the employment of homosexuals in every facet of life, but I have reservations about k-12 employment, and any form of employment that has children as its focus. In our value-free education system, it is important for homosexuals to stay in the closet vis-a-vis their orientation, or choose another form of employment.

In the ideal world, the sexuality of a person would not matter because both heterosexuals and homosexuals would vocally espouse the societal ideal, of male-female marriage, and male-female love, and heterosexuals loved their homosexual counterpart as equals, as they too are made in the image of God. But we don't live in that world. We live in one where one side champions traditional marriage but doesn't know how to make its case for it, and the other side wants to destroy marriage as an institution, and destroy gender as well.

Funny. This entire issue is only an issue because we have religions. Maybe we should focus on the impact that religions have on causing hatred toward homosexuals, or people that belong to other faiths etc...

Imagine the hatred that would vanish if religions were abandoned all of a sudden.

All the troubles with people you consider abominations or godless heathens would be non existent it would seem.

Questions for you:
Why do you willfully choose to belong to a group of people that automatically causes you to have enemies with your fellow humans. How is that an OK decision for an adult to make?