Are Catholic Schools Sliding off Course?

Jim Phelan
Apr 10, 2008 at 2:12 PM
15 comments

[Students at Marywood] Seems as though Catholic Schools are sliding off course? This is certainly true as liberal administrators at the University of St. Thomas, a Catholic university and private college in Minnesota, censored the appearance of prominent pro-life and black speaker Star Parker. Star—the best-selling author of numerous books—was slated to speak on campus about the devastating impact abortion has on minority communities. UST Vice President of Student Affairs Jane Canney nixed the idea entirely, citing “concerns” that the lecture was being underwritten by Young America’s Foundation. This, even despite students’ advocacy and desire to host Star. While banning Star, they made room for Al Franken and transgender speakers.

At one time, Ms Parker was not happy about Mary Cheney's book, Now It's My Turn: A Daughter's Chronicle of Political Life, or Cheney's insistence that gay marriage has a rightful and, what should be, a legal place in our society:

Cheney effortlessly transforms traditional marriage and family from the core institution on which free society is built into an instrument of oppression.

What would the Pope say about St Thomas nixing Star?

[Photo: Marywood University, Scranton, PA]

15 comments

Tags:

This also appears in:

Comments

Hopefully, the Holy Father will issue a call to our Catholic colleges to embrace their founding principles. We shall see.

Okay... I'll bite. What "devastating impact" does abortion have on minority communities?

Jim Phelan replied to Toe-Knee’s comment:
Apr 10, 2008
Reply

According to one black author: since 1973, 10 million black babies have been aborted; the result is that Black Americas population is currently 35% smaller and weaker than it could have been had those babies been born, The analogy is that abortion is a form of genocide. The second major point the article makes is that abortion agencies and supporters (Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc.) position themselves within the African American community and/or on the side of the African American community and as a result the racially motivated goals of extermination are more easily fulfilled.

Toe-Knee replied to Jim Phelan’s comment:
Apr 10, 2008
Reply

Your point is valid. However, no one is forcing these young mothers to abort. Would this not be merely a symptom of an overall disease which is that these minority groups have been and continue to be impoverished. So rather than giving birth to a child who will likely only grow up to become a gangbanger or other sort of criminal, she chooses to abort? The fact is that impoverished conditions are no way to raise a child and sending them into the system to be adopted has a small chance of being any better for the child.

I guess what I'm saying is more impoverished souls in a community does not make for a stronger community. Other solutions to the greater problem need to be addressed first, then the high abortion rates will right themselves.

Jim Phelan replied to Toe-Knee’s comment:
Apr 10, 2008
Reply

First, if she were not censored, we would be able to hear from her what "devastating impact" abortion has on minority communities. That's one problem of censorship.

Finally, I wouldn't predict them as being "impoverished souls".

bluesingincat replied to Toe-Knee’s comment:
Apr 10, 2008
Reply

I understand what you are trying to say, but killing the unborn isn't going to solve the problem of the poor. It only adds to the already insensitive attitude our young people have towards all life. The poor were there before Row vs Wade, and they have increased since then. When you say impoverished, I think we have to look at how that definition has changed over the years. Today the impoverished have 2.2 TV sets in the home, and do have the resources to feed and clothe their families with the help of government programs. The real problem isn't poverty, it's broken families, drugs, promiscuity and crime. Abortion is barbaric, and has not been a solution for any problem it was supposed to alleviate, nor will it ever be. Another thing I find really alarming is that our society wants to put the blame for every social woe on the backs of our unborn children. The unborn are seen by many in society as some kind of disease to be rid of, instead of the gift from God that they are. Children are not the problem. We are. Abortion has a devastating effect on minorities who are already fighting to be validated. Planned Parenthood targets the black community in the same way a shark will seek blood. The black community has a higher rate of poverty, and PP takes full advantage of this fact by offering abortion as "the only choice", insinuating that black babies would most likely not be adopted, and the "kind" thing to do would be have an abortion. I have seen this first hand many times. PP will argue with any Pro-lifer about the adoption choice. If you bring up adoption, they will counter with, "Oh, you mean rich, white people will adopt a WHITE child, who is going to adopt a black baby, or a disabled child?" And PP feels completely justified in saying it.
Abortion has a devastating effect on the black community for sure. Abortion has a devastating effect on humanity, no doubt.

When you discuss abortion, you have to look at it and say what's the alternative?

Sure, Juno was a cute movie, but does America have enough families to deal with such a huge number of unwanted kids?

And surely this is not just an American issue, because if you look at it on a global scale, one could argue that the pro-life stance is what leads to teenage glue sniffers on the streets of Vietnam who beg for cash and live in packs, or child labor houses in India, Egypt, Turkey (who do you think sew the carpets...) and even China's village brick making industry.

So one must ask, is abortion the alternative to child labor, child abandonment or even the child porn industry?

That's on the topic of abortion.

But on the above, isn't it more a topic on the freedom of speech and censorship?

Yes, the topic was suppose to be on the freedom of speech and censorship. Abortion is an emotionally charged issue.

You alluded that without abortion there would be more children, but we have no proof this would increase the population, per say, because most who do abort turn around and have a completed pregnancy.

When you discuss abortion, you have to look at it and say what's the alternative?

Oh, I don't know. How about sex education? How about prophylactics or (God forbid) abstinence?

...one could argue that the pro-life stance is what leads to teenage glue sniffers on the streets of Vietnam who beg for cash and live in packs, or child labor houses in India, Egypt, Turkey (who do you think sew the carpets...) and even China's village brick making industry.

One could argue that, but it would not be a very good argument. Poverty is what leads to these children being in dire circumstances, not abortion. Poverty has always been a global issue, and always will. Abortion is not a solution to poverty, it is genocide. It says that because these children are poor, they are not worthwhile. It says they will be nothing more than a burden on their family and on society.

[And surely this is not just an American issue, because if you look at it on a global scale, one could argue that the pro-life stance is what leads to teenage glue sniffers on the streets of Vietnam who beg for cash and live in packs, or child labor houses in India, Egypt, Turkey (who do you think sew the carpets...) and even China's village brick making industry.]

Abortion is largely an American Issue with the exception of China which has embraced it fully and dramatically. What leads to most of the world's homeless children is war and famine and in some cases, lack of morals and family values. Throw away children are from areas where the governments are so corrupt or militant that aid agencies are rarely able to get in there and help. It is just not fair to the discussion to compare those countries' homeless children with our relative lack of throwaway and homeless. China's throwaways are not for lack of abortion or birth control. Those throwaways are nearly entirely girls because every family wants their one allowed child to be a boy. Boy have more cultural value in their society.

In my experience the Catholic Church has many initiatives in schools from teaching from 6th grade give or take about abstinence and about anti-abortion. Churches organize bus rides to DC for pro-life marches, their are masses for the unborn said once a year, initiatives to help women who had them, and on and on. That college did what it did. But I ask that you not generalize the Catholic religion. It smacks of prejudice against a faith that is in every way pro-life. Is this organization perfect - uhhh, I live in MA so I can say no. Like any organization there are major screw ups by some within. The Catholic Church is staunchly anti-abortion. What one college did does not mean anything about the position the Church or schools have. I'm actually shocked they did that.

STU is an anecdote, agreeably, and prayerfully not a trend in general.

Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Then I only ask as a Christian that you not put up provocative headlines about the Catholic Church or Catholic Schools as a general trend. While provocative headlines are effective, if someone sees the headline only, then they are left with a view that the Catholic Schools are sliding off course. Geez Louise, hasn't this new Pope given us 7 more sins to be thankful for? How much more can we ask for :))) JOKE But really, I ask that all Christians be tolerant and non-judgmental of denominations. And I know that's not the case. Personally I believe we should be tolerant and understand if not agree with all faiths - as long as harm is not promoted as part of the faith or bigotry toward others (I say as a disclaimer to tolerance).

Part of the reason I am sensitive is while I believe you meant it as what you said, I have seen recently when some stupid Catholic girls on Easter made an anti-war statement in church. You know what? I respect that they are pro-peace, pro-life. I don't respect their actions and think they need to be straightened out. But the little sarcastic snipes about Catholic school girls that wove in that blog post in comments were indicative of an underlying religious prejudice by some Evangelical or Born Again or whatever version of Christians. And I am so not that I don't comprehend it. Isn't this about love vs. the right way?

Oh and the McCain backer - I don't even want to remember his name that calls the church a whore or whatever. What the heck? What have these sermons become in so many churches? Preaching hate and bigotry? I shake my head. I listen to sermons about Jesus' words or Old Testament and how that maps onto our daily lives and how we live them. Hey, but that's me.

My headline was an echo of the News Observer . At least I was being responsible in asking this in a form of a question, whereas the orginal article was headlined in the form of a statement. I don't think the latter is responsble. But, that's today's media for ya. At any rate, never intended to scandal or provoke ill-will at the Church (Catholic schools). From me it's people are loved and respected. Anecdotes are just that, nothing is too big for God!

:) Thanks for the response. I respect the honesty, the dignity and the lovely end sentiment.

Are Catholic Schools Sliding off Course?

Comments

Post a comment

Advertisement