I think the main assumption underlying each of these arguments is that the various conceptions of the Good Life that each educational institution endorses are equally acceptable, or at least, ought to be given equal consideration. Third, religions really need to think seriously about what they think their message is really about. BU Today reserves the right to reject or edit submissions. Season two kicks off on October 4, and the team hosted their annual media day on October 3, I think that where children go to school is none of your business, unless, of course, they are your own children. Just like parents would have the right to not send their kids to such a school. There is no rhetorical power in that.
What in my remarks would make you think I would object to either of these institutions?
This week in S. Here is what the Catechism teaches about this subject: The point was that cowards attack the Catholic Church because they know Catholicism is safe for them to attack. This country would be no further in Equal Rights if the offending parties were applauded. The professor suggesting we applaud this action is reprehensible.
I totally get it, Just Curious. There is no substantive proof that this was a hate crime. Please have a seat. In the end, discrimination is discrimination. It appears that you predictions will be fallacious. The city just celebrated its th birthday and after all that time we finally have a professional sports team. If schools are not allowed to differ on the basis of different understandings of the Good Life, as faith-based schools and also many independent secular schools do, they will differ only on test scores, and parents with more resources will always find a way to get their children into schools with higher scores, either through moving to affluent areas or by paying tuition.