Catholic Profs in U.S. Told to Report Opposition to Gay Marriage as Harassment


An anti-harassment training program at a traditionally-Catholic university in Wisconsin has shed light on the present position at the ruling U.S. government agency that simply speaking against gay marriage at schools and at many other places is discrimination and illegal harassment, and should be reported.


Increasingly, the EEOC along with Title IX, is becoming the Thought Police. Those with improper thoughts must be reported to the authorities.


Thought police are everywhere - even …guess where:rolleyes:



Doesn’t surprise me. I’m sure that soon enough they’ll be allowing pedophilia and bestiality; then forcing it down the throats of those who think such acts are immoral. By calling those against bestiality, ‘Zoophobes,’ or somesuch. These activists will tolerate no dissent, they will show no mercy, and they will do all that they can do to stamp out opposition. Be it by violence, or by the slow erosion of rights, you can expect it to happen at some point. Just as the Gay “marriage” activists are doing now.


It would be very hard to define Pedophilia or Bestiality as consensual and therefore permissible. In a secular context between consenting adults, I see no real issue with permanent same sex relationships. I also would never support forcing churches like the Catholic church to perform gay marriages.

Not everyone who has little issue with secular gay marriage is unrelenting in their view point. In fact, I’d bet you’d see many people in support of gay marriage agree with the above. It’s not as bad as you think for your view point.


LOL, right!
I can’t imagine a leader or institution telling their people what and how they should think and believe, and chastising them when they do not follow as they are told!



From the article:

“Since 2012, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has held “sex stereotypes” like “the belief that men should only date women or that women should only marry men” to be illegal discrimination on the basis of sex.”

Note: the “belief” that same sex marriage is wrong is itself illegal discrimination according to the EEOC. You had better be careful about expressing your beliefs in the workplace.

Oh, it’s okay to believe that same sex marriage is great; but the opposite belief is de facto illegal.


Most people aren’t hired to unload their beliefs on their coworkers. Many employers have policies which discourage conversations regarding controversial social issues, religion, or politics while on the clock. Some even have social media policies when you’re off the clock!


So, they’re saying that everyone should be bisexual, otherwise you’re bigoted against half the world population…



A policy with which I agree. But it is noteworthy that certain beliefs are considered illegal discrimination under EEOC guidelines. The policy did not state whether opposition to traditional marriage might also be considered harassment, but possibly opposition to same sex marriage is a more serious offense under EEOC guidelines than opposition to traditional marriage.


The beliefs are not considered illegal by the EEOC. Expressing them in a harassing manner is considered illegal and that is defined in the following way by the EEOC: “Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).


This story is also reported in the National Catholic Register:


From the article:

“Christine Nazer, a public affairs specialist for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, told CNA Dec. 4 that courts have found “particular pejorative behavior or remarks about same-sex relationships to be potential harassment (which employers may act to stop even if it has not yet risen to the actionable level of severe or pervasive), or alternatively to be evidence of discriminatory motivation in a termination case.””

This quote was used as evidence that people can be reported for opposing gay marriage. Only in a world where one considers that a “pejorative” is that true. I find it exceptionally noteworthy that the harassing language used in the PowerPoint to oppose gay marriage was not included in the article (likely because it did not fit the narrative of the story).

There are kind ways to oppose gay marriage, and there are homophobic ways to do so. The anti-harassment PowerPoint could have gone exactly as described and still been completely in line with Catholic teaching. If someone has more detail on the exact words used in the PowerPoint, please feel free to correct me.


so Catholic teaching is now harassment?


We in America have let the God-hating Christ-killing leftist fanatics take power and we will pay the price for our lack of vigilance.


I would have to know a bit more about the situation before I weighed in with a definite opinion.

Quote from the article:

Brian Dorrington, senior director of communications at Marquette University, told CNA Nov. 21 that the university requires all employees, faculty, staff and student employees, to complete an anti-harassment module “in accordance with federal law and university policy,” He added that harassment training “includes the latest changes in law, and workplace diversity training reflects developing regulations.”

He said the presentation uses “hypothetical scenarios” are “teaching tools do not necessarily equate to university policy.”

The presentation is from another company, not the university, and the spokesperson said that the actual word-for-word presentation might not be adopted as university policy. I would think at a Catholic institution, there would be no big problem with two believing Catholics quietly stating what they think is Catholic teaching.

Unfortunately, we don’t have the exact language of the presentation. We only know from this that the characters said "have been talking about their opposition to same-sex marriage” and that they’ve been doing it “all week.” If it’s really negative language, I can see why a workplace would prohibit it, not just because it’s “the right thing to do” but because of legal liability.


I give up, where?


Not only that quote but also the hypothetical scenario in the presentation that gives a fictional dialogue between Hans, Maria, and Becky. In that dialogue Maria is told that opposition to gay “marriage” is “ridiculous” and the scenario ends with the advice to “report potential harassment right away." Becky and Maria, according to the presentation, “have been talking about their opposition to same-sex marriage” followed by “Hans is right to report Maria and Becky’s conversation.”


From the article:

The Marquette University anti-harassment presentation says Hans eventually talks to human resources after another week of listening to Maria and Becky criticize “gay marriage.”

Becky is shown telling Maria that his complaint is “ridiculous.”

“I can’t believe he’s trying to trample on my free speech rights.”

Maria replies: “Why does he even care? Is he gay?”

The presentation continues:

“Even though Becky and Maria were only expressing their opinions and didn’t mean to offend, they could still be engaging in harassment. The complainant does not need to be involved in the conversation to be offended. Hans’ sexual orientation is also irrelevant; he does not need to be gay to be offended by his coworkers’ discussion of same-sex marriage.”

It seems that Becky is telling Maria that Hans’ complaint is “ridiculous.”

This segment was probably included to show that a complaint isn’t “ridiculous” just because the person who is offended is not part of the group of people referred to.


But, but, they care about the POOR!

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit