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


Good clarification. :o


The EEOC exists to crimilize beliefs. So this is nothing new or surprising. Since we have an anti-Christian state its various arms will be engaged in punishing people for living a Christian life where it conflicts with the state. The state to some degree always enforces morality. For the Christian, it is foolish to support the current form of government which claims to be irreligious, when it can never really be, and in reality is some sort of democratic secular humanism, which is a strange, unpredictable belief system.


In my own experience the EEOC creates more workplace havoc than it could possibly solve. At one time I was a manager in a Federal agency. Every time I filled a job opening–every single time–all or nearly all of those who did not get the job filed EEOC complaints, each of which was time consuming and inefficient. And every single complainant was given some type of settlement, usually monetary, by the agency. Obviously all those complaints were not well founded. (In fact, none of them were) There could only be one successful applicant. Yet everyone managed to get rewarded for filing an EEOC complaint. The agency’s rationale was that it was cheaper to settle early in the process than to take the process to completion. Even if the agency was found to be without fault, it was still cheaper to settle. So there was no incentive not to file EEOC complaints, and a good reason to do so.


Constant attempts to convert one to belief in Catholic teaching, or any teaching for that matter, in the workplace is harrassment.


Propaganda to convert one to secular thinking, however, is a-okay. Hence why the government has this sort of training to begin with.


The training is about what is considered harrasment, and doesn’t endorse any particular belief. If I had a Catholic co-worker who I discussed my beliefs on marriage equality with, tell me that he didn’t agree, and didn’t want to talk about it any more, I would respect that. If I didn’t, I would expect to be reported for harrassment.


Good, because it seems to me that there have been constant attempts nearly everywhere to convert everyone to accept same sex marriage as a good thing. Does anyone else feel harassed?


I probably wouldn’t have a problem with a policy like that.

An anti-harassment policy covers what goes on in the workplace. I can’t see a conflict between a policy saying that I can’t harass gays in my workplace and my private religious belief that God intended marriage as between a man and a woman.

I can see having a rule saying I can’t go to Steve down the hall and start criticizing his relationship with his partner. I can’t see that as saying I as a Catholic have to privately accept his relationship as a good thing.

And, as the first poster above said, it would probably work both ways. If someone in the workplace was criticizing my private religious beliefs I’d first say I don’t want to talk about it; if it continued, I would complain about it and it would be stopped.



Ever since the courts allowed the standard to shift from ‘a reasonable person’ to a ‘reasonable minority person’ (initially, the ‘reasonable woman’ standard in sexual harassment cases) the point of view of the minority is the defining standard and since homosexuals do not feel harassed in hearing people talk about the need for gay marriage but do feel harassed by talk of why it is wrong that is the new standard for everyone.

We have let the inmates take over the asylum, and that will remain our flaw till we readdress the issue or we go extinct.


This really is an outrage. It undermines one’s right to freedom of conscience and the right to act in accordance with one’s beliefs (or even simply to express them). And it is the US Federal Government doing it. It makes you wonder where this will all end.


I don’t understand you last sentence. Are the minorities the inmates and the majority the guards and administrators?

As far as using the minority as the defining standard, Catholic Social teaching agrees with that standard in it’s preferential option for the poor. The most vulnerable deserve preferential treatment.


I don’t think so. The problem isn’t so much that some people think same-sex marriage is a “bad” thing…it’s that those people try to interfere with other people’s lives who think differently. In other words, no one is making you marry someone of the same sex…but don’t try to prevent someone else who believes in it and wants to.

I can’t find the quotes you posted to be in the article link you include.

They are not talking about expressing an opinion, they are talking about constant offensive comments.
If a group of people at your workplace were consistently making fun of the communion wafer or Jesus on the crucifix, that would be harassment, too, and should be reported.



I’ve heard really horrible things said about the Catholic Church from numerous co-workers, to my face (usually along the lines that it is “intolerant” “conservative” and/or “anti-gay”) It got a little tense at one point when I jumped in to defend Benedict, believe me - took a long time to live that down. We have a campaign to raise funds for Planned Parenthood every Christmas, complete with speeches where we all gather and listen with coffee and donuts. Good news is everyone knows I am a conservative Catholic now. :slight_smile: My coworkers and I avoid controversial subjects like the plague and live pretty much in geniune harmony. But I worry about official guidelines like this. It’s trouble. It gives them more power to go after you if they are so inclined - that is the bottom line.


As far as using the minority as the defining standard, Catholic Social teaching agrees with that standard in it’s preferential option for the poor. The most vulnerable deserve preferential treatment.

So are you saying the Catholic church supports those who are not poor as being given unequal treatment before the law, and not equal standing in our criminal courts?

I seriously doubt that.

IF a man gets raped in prison, his case should not depend on what a woman would think.

But then maybe that is why feminists have been successful in narrowing the nations discussion of rape to female only cases of rape? Does that serve the interests of fairness and justice for the poor guy that gets turned out in prison?

OF course not, but instead of treating it seriously, we get all outraged by a drunk guy having sex with a drunk woman (why is that rape of BOTH were drunk?) and some guy in for bouncing three checks gets turned out as a sex slave in prison and people make a joke out of it. I cant count how many times I have watched some cop show and the cops would say something along the lines of ‘Get ready to be Bubba’s wife, creep’.

The double standard is just astonishing, and it permeates into every level of our justice system where there is a perceived minority group involved. We see the system bend over backward for those in the minority and dismiss the victimization of the majority groups, whatever they may be.

Is that what you think the church wants to see happen?


Pretty much my experience as well. They will just show preference in harshly disciplining politically incorrect actions like speaking against Gay Marriage, while Church bashing will get maybe a slap on the wrist.


Such as forcing bakers and florists out of business if they don’t specifically participate in the pageantry of a gay ceremony, or a bachelor party with a stripper, or a Klan rally, etc… Darn bakers!


The undergraduate teacher at the heart of this has an unusual area of expertise.

Cheryl’s research interests are first and foremost Animal Ethics, including how Animal Ethics intersects with Animal Theology, Animal Minds, and Animal Consciousness.


Unless you teach in a Catholic school, I don’t want to hear about it from you at work. The same goes for any “religion” teaching. There is a time and a place for everything.


No. And I work with married straight people and married gay people. No one is harassing anyone.


What happened to freedom of speech…how can you make that illegal to speak against?

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