One of the most common rebuttals to the situation of the children being raised by Lesbian couple \u00a0not being able to attend a Catholic schools is the seeming issue of fairness. \u00a0That a equal standard is not being applied to other irregular situations involving\u00a0heterosexual\u00a0couples and the children being raised by them. \u00a0I agree with Jimmy Akin take on this and as he usually does he puts it succinctly.<\/p>\n
You see, an awful lot of parents of kids in Catholic school aren\u2019t morally perfect, and if children were to be excluded on the mere grounds that their parents are sinners then enrollment would be quite low indeed.<\/p>\n
And this is true. If a Catholic school applied that kind of test in determining enrollment then it would thwart its principal mission, which is providing a Catholic education to students to help them be\u00a0more<\/em> holy and closer to God.<\/p>\n
So, \u201cYour child can\u2019t enroll because you\u2019re a sinner\u201d is a nonstarter as a principle of enrollment.<\/p>\n
But does it follow from this that a parents\u2019 actions should have\u00a0no<\/em> bearing on the enrollment of their children? Couldn\u2019t\u00a0certain<\/em> actions of the parents cause such a problem that it would fundamentally interfere with the school\u2019s mission?<\/p>\n
Suppose that the parents insisted that their child attend the school\u00a0naked<\/em> (and suppose that civil law allowed this, for purposes of the thought experiment).<\/p>\n
This fundamental rejection of the school\u2019s dress code would cause such severe problems that the school would be entirely warranted in saying, \u201cI\u2019m sorry, but your child cannot come to school if you\u2019re going to insist on nakedness.\u201d<\/p>\n
That\u2019s an extreme, but it\u2019s not hard to see how having a child in class whose \u201cparents\u201d are of the same gender could interfere with the mission of the school:<\/p>\n
1) It will impede the ability of teachers to be frank about the nature of marriage due to the problems that will ensue with a child in this situation in the classroom.<\/p>\n
2) The child will also become a proselytizer for homosexual \u201cmarriage\u201d and\/or be tormented relentlessly by other children.<\/p>\n
3) The other children will be scandalized (in both the proper and the colloquial senses) by knowledge of the child\u2019s situation.<\/p>\n
4) All of the above will be exacerbated to the extent that the \u201cparents\u201d have any presence at or try to play any role in the life of the school.<\/p>\n
So . . . bad idea.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s not the fact that the \u201cparents\u201d are sinners that makes it rational for the school to deny their children entrance. It is the fact that the nature of their public relationship is such that either the school would have to refrain from teaching the fullness of Christian doctrine regarding the nature of matrimony or tremendous problems would arise with a child in this situation in the student body.<\/p>\n
At least that\u2019s how I see it.<\/p>\n
How do you? [National Catholic Register Blog<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Catholic schools can’t become Parent Cops seeking out the situations of the children’s parents. \u00a0But the situation of a same-sex couple is apparent from the get go and is quite public. \u00a0The situation for the child is of course quite hard. \u00a0Dawn Stefanowicz<\/a> a child who grew up with same-sex parents has worked with many other children from similar situations and it is a very difficult circumstance for those children.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
One of the most common rebuttals to the situation of the children being raised by Lesbian couple \u00a0not being able to attend a Catholic schools is the seeming issue of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10266","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-punditry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10266","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10266"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10266\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10268,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10266\/revisions\/10268"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10266"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10266"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10266"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}