Calgary's bishop putting girls' health at risk

[jammies]

To remain logically consistent, medical treatment for all disfiguring diseases should also be condemned by the Bishop.

"It's good you have a warty face, it's preventing you from any chance at fornication!"
"Those open sores are God's way of telling you to keep it in your pants!"
"The leprosy - it keeps you virgin!"

[Locke]

Originally Posted by billybob123

Can't people get this vaccine at a doctor's office? How many 13-year old girls don't have a family doctor?

I'm not saying I agree with the Bishop on this one (which I don't) but it's not like this is the only place this vaccine is available.

I found it interesting where I grew up and went to high school - there were a public (mine) and catholic school next to each other. I can count the # of pregnant girls at my school on two fingers; the catholic school had that per month. Seems like covering your ears and pretending it's not happening doesn't seem to be working.

Lots. Family doctors are in short supply here in Calgary.

Furthermore, most 13 year old girls tend to be fairly healthy, so they probably dont visit their doctors very often.

Bishop Henry is a dinosaur, this is grandstanding BS. To me it smacks of someone who realizes that the teachings of chastity are so outdated that most people disregard them out of hand and this is his weak attempt, yet only opportunity to hope girls get this disease so he has a chance to say;

'I told you so, if only you'd listened.'

[Flash Walken]

"I'm not allowed to have sex with boys, teenage girls shouldn't, either!"

- Bishop Henry

I bet he's got an ugly penis.

[The Yen Man]

So let me get this straight. The bishop is saying rather than trusting faithful Catholics to do the right thing by themselves, they need to be unneccessarily exposed to potential life threatening diseases in order for them to steer clear of sins? So hypothetically, if there was an HIV vaccine, he would advocate against it? Yikes, his God sure doesn't sound very merciful or loving to me.

[undercoverbrother]

Is the catholic school board totally funded by the church and the parents, or does it get public funding as well?

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Is the catholic school board totally funded by the church and the parents, or does it get public funding as well?

It's taxpayer funded.

When the census-takers come knocking on your door every few years, they always ask which school board (Public or Catholic) you want to direct your tax dollars to support.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

It's taxpayer funded.

When the census-takers come knocking on your door every few years, they always ask which school board (Public or Catholic) you want to direct your tax dollars to support.

So the church, as an entitiy, doesn't put any funds into the running of the schoolboard?

[Olao32]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Is the catholic school board totally funded by the church and the parents, or does it get public funding as well?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure they are publically funded. I say this because of the man/woman who comes to my door once a year and ask which school board I support in the community.

I thought they used this information to plan/build schools in the district.

[habernac]

I've always found it hilarious that members of the Catholic church are doling out advice on how families should be raised. How many kids have you raised exactly? Sex education from a bunch of virgins. Sounds like an awesome idea.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

So the church, as an entitiy, doesn't put any funds into the running of the schoolboard?

I'm honestly not sure. I can say with 100% confidence is that the Catholic school board receives public taxpayer money, but I don't know if their budget also includes funding from the local diocese.

[FiftyBelow]

Originally Posted by nik-

Actually, the church should totally alter it's stance to conform to modern society. It can do that or die.

That itself would be hypocritical on the church's part. The church has it's own perception of morality based in the gospels that it's teachings must always adhere to. To frequently "alter it's stance" just because society tells it to, would be going against everything that makes Catholicism what is. If the church dies out... then so be it. It's extreme, but I'd rather my religion become irrelevant than to sacrifice what I truly believe are key moral values of the church. At least true Catholics will know that the religion remained faithful to it's own teachings. Being Catholic isn't about choosing what's most convenient to yourself. Maybe it's something only religious people understand. But in the end, all that matters is the relationship between an individual and their God.

Originally Posted by Rerun

Yet apparently the Edmonton Catholic school board doesn't seem to have a problem with this. I think the problem lies more with the bishop than the school board.

Lets face it. Bishop Henry is a bit of a dinosaur. He's shown it in the past with and he's showing it again. I'm sure he still believes that masturbation is a sin.
.

Honestly, as a Catholic I disagree with the ECS. Indeed, the Bishops have certain latitude within their diocese. I'm not too familiar with what Archbishop Smith said though so I can't really comment. It could be that the Archbishop didn't willing approve but that the ECS just simply ignored him? Even then, there will be some deviation between Bishops. It's only natural. Less so however, for more more larger issues (abortion, contraception etc).

As a mother of a daughter that will be going the catholic school route, she will be getting this vaccine when the time comes. Even if I have to go to the doctor to get it.

Why wouldn't I give my little the girl the opportunity to have something that may potentially reduce the risk of getting certain types of cancers?

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by FiftyBelow

It's a Catholic school board plain and simple. You can't expect such schools to promote policies that are not consistent with Catholic morality. To explain it simply without going deep into theology, Catholicism teaches chastity and no-sex-until marriage. Catholicism rejects the HPV vaccine, contraception and other controversial medical procedures simply because chastity is seen as the solutions to the challenges that the HPV vaccine and contraceptive techniques are meant to address.

If Catholics are practicing catholic sexual ethics, there is no need to consider such medical procedures in their view. Yes, I understand that in reality, most do not follow such strict teachings. But the church should no be expected to alter it's moral beliefs simply because many of its members are not able to abide by its teachings. Contrary to what many non religious think... the church is not a democracy that should cater to it's peoples desires. The church is simply remaining consistent with it's perspective of "truth" and the gospel. (Whether you agree with that perspective is an entirely different debate)

If Catholic parents want to provide their children with the vaccine, they can do so without using a channel provided by the Catholic school board. This is nothing new. Those who have disagreed with the church have always sought other means that are not provided by the church or it's affiliations. Again, they are free to do so.

Except they are publicly funded. If they want to promote their moral dogma they should be a private institution not funded by the public taxpayers.

[HotHotHeat]

I've never understood why a religious figurehead is considered to have a valid, or even relevant opinion on sexual health issues? Maybe I've been away from church for too long.

[NuclearPizzaMan]

The obvious solution is to dissolve the catholic school board and roll the students into the public system.

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

I've never understood why a religious figurehead is considered to have a valid, or even relevant opinion on sexual health issues? Maybe I've been away from church for too long.

Because God.

[MarchHare]

That itself would be hypocritical on the church's part. The church has it's own perception of morality based in the gospels that it's teachings must always adhere to. To frequently "alter it's stance" just because society tells it to, would be going against everything that makes Catholicism what is. If the church dies out... then so be it. It's extreme, but I'd rather my religion become irrelevant than to sacrifice what I truly believe are key moral values of the church. At least true Catholics will know that the religion remained faithful to it's own teachings. Being Catholic isn't about choosing what's most convenient to yourself. Maybe it's something only religious people understand. But in the end, all that matters is the relationship between an individual and their God.

But the Catholic Church is already known for changing its stance on issues as it gains more knowledge over time! Here's one famous example:

During the seventeenth century, the Church's inquisitors tried Galileo for heresy because of his support of the scientific theory that the earth orbited around the sun, an idea that went against the Biblical teachings of the time. He was punished by house arrest for the remainder of his life.

Centuries later, the Church accepted that Galileo was right all along. Pope John Paul II said this in 1992:

Thanks to his intuition as a brilliant physicist and by relying on different arguments, Galileo, who practically invented the experimental method, understood why only the sun could function as the centre of the world, as it was then known, that is to say, as a planetary system. The error of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the Earth, was to think that our understanding of the physical world's structure was, in some way, imposed by the literal sense of Sacred Scripture.

Eight years later, in 2000, the pope formally apologized on behalf of past pontiffs for mistakes committed by the Vatican, including the trial of Galileo.

[FiftyBelow]

I believe that CSSD is funded by tax payer money. However, I believe the majority of that is funded by taxpayers with kids in the CSSD? Don't remember. But I think in the tax forms that we fill, there is a choice indicating which system people intend to put their kids?

Originally Posted by habernac

I've always found it hilarious that members of the Catholic church are doling out advice on how families should be raised. How many kids have you raised exactly? Sex education from a bunch of virgins. Sounds like an awesome idea.

Admittedly, I laughed. Honestly though, I don't see anything wrong with the sexual ethics that Catholicism teaches. Sure, it's highly idealistic and difficult for people to follow. But I believe it's something we should strive for and that we'd be better off for it.

For example, people laugh at why masturbation is a sin. But when you look at the reasons behind it, it makes pretty good sense. A culture of masturbation and pornography fosters one that is less respectful of individuals. What does it say about a society when they're willing to view other people as just a piece of meat, a simple object of sexual desire, a commodity?

But I'm not going to get into it here. By no means do I come close to being able to follow perfectly, Catholic sexual ethics. But I try. Is what the Catholic church teaches really as crazy as people make it out to be?

[MarchHare]

A culture of masturbation and pornography fosters one that is less respectful of individuals. What does it say about a society when they're willing to view other people as just a piece of meat, a simple object of sexual desire, a commodity?

I fail to see the link between masturbation and "a society that is less respectful of individuals" where people are viewed as "a piece of meat, a simple object of sexual desire, a commodity".

You can't just write something like that as if it's a universally-accepted fact without supporting your claim.

[FiftyBelow]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

But the Catholic Church is already known for changing its stance on issues as it gains more knowledge over time! Here's one famous example:

During the seventeenth century, the Church's inquisitors tried Galileo for heresy because of his support of the scientific theory that the earth orbited around the sun, an idea that went against the Biblical teachings of the time. He was punished by house arrest for the remainder of his life.

Centuries later, the Church accepted that Galileo was right all along. Pope John Paul II said this in 1992:



Eight years later, in 2000, the pope formally apologized on behalf of past pontiffs for mistakes committed by the Vatican, including the trial of Galileo.

Yes, you are entirely correct. Crusades come to mind when when regarding some of the church's past mistakes as well. The church is able to change and certainly it has to some degree. But there are also key elements that have remained the same throughout it's existence. It's why these debates eventually come up and why people accuse the church of being dinosaurs. It's the major key elements of the faith that I believe need to remain unchanged.

As expected though, there's always a wide spectrum of opinion on the type of change. I guess as most can tell, I'm a traditionalist Catholic and tend to apply that stringent interpretation.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I fail to see the link between masturbation and "a society that is less respectful of individuals" where people are viewed as "a piece of meat, a simple object of sexual desire, a commodity".

You can't just write something like that as if it's a universally-accepted fact without supporting your claim.

Because God.