Originally posted by NemesioIt is not clear to me that the archdiocese actually supported this decision, or even realised it was happening under their noses. The decision no1 is talking about (from the link I provided) was the decision to ask pregnant students to study from home due to safety concerns. In this case, I thought it was a sensible decision (the school doesn't have elevators - she would've been forced to go up and down staircases multiple times a day; she had suffered a leg injury not so long back as well - why would the school want to risk some kind of accident and miscarriage?)
That the archdiocese supported the decision was atrocious.
It is because the archdiocese supported the action that a bias against the RCC exists.
Their action is shameful.
Nemesio
In any case, either the archdiocese knew this was happening, or it did not. If they did, then this is another disgraceful chapter in the US Bishops' track record.
Originally posted by lucifershammerDoesn't the fact that they knew of the earlier decision i.e. to make her be home schooled even though her doctor said it was not necessary - imply that the diocese was in touch with the principal regarding the matter? Doesn't that lead to the logical conclusion that they knew of and approved of the decision to ban her from the graduation ceremony? You will probably say "Not necessarily" which is true as far as it goes, but still the available evidence leads to that conclusion as the most logical. I'm not "assuming", I'm reasoning by the evidence in front of me what the most likely scenario was. Obviously the case was well-known: articles had been published about it in the local newspapers prior to graduation; do you really believe that the diocese took a "hands-off" approach? I'd say you made a judgment that people were biased when all they were doing is drawing the most likely conclusion; if you have some evidence that the diocese disapproved of the principal's actions or were unaware of them, please present it.
No - just a judgment. It would be a bias if I assumed they knew about it.
Originally posted by no1marauderNot necessarily. 🙂
Doesn't the fact that they knew of the earlier decision i.e. to make her be home schooled even though her doctor said it was not necessary - imply that the diocese was in touch with the principal regarding the matter? Doesn't that lead to the logical conclusion that they knew of and approved of the decision to ban her from the graduation ceremo ...[text shortened]... the diocese disapproved of the principal's actions or were unaware of them, please present it.
But all the points you're making came about later (in the context of this thread). Read the first post in this thread again. Read the next five responses. Are those responses all reasoned judgments based on the evidence that came about from the initial post? Maybe I can give them the benefit of the doubt if I thought this was a particularly well-known case in the US before this incident (for instance, I don't have to think about what assumptions people make in the Terri Schiavo case - almost everyone has some knowledge of the facts, along with lots of misperceptions). Was it?
I have no problems with someone taking a position against the hierarchy on this issue having approached it from multiple points of view and multiple news sources. I would do so myself. But is that what happened here (at least initially)?
This is the bias I am talking about.
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerThey may have assumed (as I did) that ALL Catholic schools in the US are under the direct authority of the Catholic hierarchy; I went to a Catholic elementary and high school and this was true in that case. I know you quoted Canon Law which allows a different set up but to my knowledge all Catholic schools at those levels (not universities) in the US are under the direct authority of the local archdiocese. Dr. Scribbles obviously believed so when you responded to him by quoting Canon Law. Thus, it seems that the posters were under the assumption that the Church hierarchy was involved in the decision and that seems a logical one given the normal (always?) organization of Catholic schools in the US. So what bias are you talking about?
Not necessarily. 🙂
But all the points you're making came about later (in the context of this thread). [b]Read the first post in this thread again. Read the next five responses. Are those responses all reasoned judgments base ...[text shortened]... here (at least initially)?
This is the bias I am talking about.[/b]
Originally posted by lucifershammerThe thing about sensationalist crap like this is that the catholic church and the protestant purveyors of the moral majority consistantly behave in a holier than though maner. The article may be sensationalist but its probably isn't crap. Crap is condeming a teenage girl for her behaviour while saying nothing to the teenage boy who indulged in the same pleasure. Crap is robbing someone of their achievement in school for an act of human frailty
Oh please! Take a look at yourselves - you see the words "Roman Catholic" in a news article and begin to rub your hands with glee.
There is no indication whatsoever in the article that the Church or any of the hierarchy was involved in any way in this incident. This story is deliberately written to be sensationalist crap and you know it.
At le ...[text shortened]... ative news sites as well:
http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/NEWSV5/storyV5stjudegrad29w.htm
Originally posted by aardvarkhomeI can probably agree with the second point (though I doubt it's that simple in this case). On the first - the school didn't even know who the father was.
The thing about sensationalist crap like this is that the catholic church and the protestant purveyors of the moral majority consistantly behave in a holier than though maner. The article may be sensationalist but its probably isn't crap. Crap is condeming a teenage girl for her behaviour while saying nothing to the teenage boy who indulged in the same pleasure. Crap is robbing someone of their achievement in school for an act of human frailty
Originally posted by Ringtailhunteris it a genuine post?
Pregnant student banned from graduation goes anyway
Associated Press
May 18, 2005 GRAD0519
MONTGOMERY, Ala. — A pregnant student who was banned from graduation at her Roman Catholic high school announced her own name and walked across the stage anyway at the close of the program.
Alysha Cosby's decision prompted cheers and applause ...[text shortened]... lowed to participate in graduation.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/5410673.html[/b]
The link states its an "ADVERTISMENT"