Video: University makes diploma contingent on supporting gay rights?
posted at 3:35 pm on July 28, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
CNN has an interesting roundtable on the case of Jennifer Keeton, who has sued Augusta State University to keep from getting expelled for not repudiating her statements about homosexuality. Keeton expressed her biblical perspective on the subject in and out of class while working toward a degree in counseling, and the school mandated a “remediation plan” that appears to have required her to renounce her Christian doctrine in order to gain a diploma from the school. The school has responded that a bias against homosexuality would disqualify Keeton from certification, a position that would put most Christians in Keeton’s position.
Does this amount to a “thought police”? A religious test for education? Or does Keeton’s lack of diversity appreciation really make her unqualified for a degree and career in counseling?
It sounds to me like the ACA wants a “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule for religion. That runs square into the First Amendment, especially for a state-run school. The ACA’s idea of who comes first doesn’t get to trump the restriction on freedom of religious exercise. If clients get off-put by Keeton’s approach to counseling, they can look for another counselor. Now, the ACA can decide not to certify her; as a private organization, they have that prerogative. If they do that explicitly based on her religious belief, however, they may have a problem with that in court, especially as it will block Keeton’s ability to make a living.
The state-run school has no such leeway. They cannot impose a religious test for graduation, no matter how they dress it up.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 Next »
Wait, Holger… so now you’re suggesting that external factors may play into a person’s sexual orientation? So, a different set of factors may change the course of that person’s development? So… sexual orientation is not an immutable trait, but is influenced by a variety of factors? Could any of those factors be self-determination, perhaps? Hmm.
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:07 AM
So… your reference for what does or does not constitute sin in God’s eyes is an online dictionary; mine is the Bible. Huh.
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM
homosexuality used to be illegal too…duhhhhhhhh
and what IS the age of consent? nothing more than an arbitrary number.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM
Holger, Madison:
Song of Solomon 4:15-16. A man and his wife… enjoying one another.
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:16 AM
People can be converted from one religion to another too. Not all will though, nor should they be compelled.
dedalus on July 29, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Life,Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…this woman’s Constitutional Rights are being trampled on…just saying there is a remedy and maybe she should take some of the remedy in $$$ from the campus to teach them a FUNDAMENTAL LESSON.
Dr Evil on July 29, 2010 at 11:21 AM
I didn’t say anything about sin. I pointed out the definition of sodomy. You scoffed at it because it’s an “online dictionary”. Would Merriam-Webster satisfy your snide? Aw nuts…same definition.
Now that we’ve determined what sodomy is, it’s your turn: is sodomy a sin? If it is, then oral is a sin.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 11:22 AM
Slavery used to be legal too…duhhhhhhhh
See? I can play the silly comparison game, too!
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 11:23 AM
You missed the point: the very fact that it CAN and DOES happen means that it is a choice, not an inherent trait! This is the very thing this student asserted that got her in trouble with the university.
Let’s say it all together now: “homosexuality is a chosen lifestyle.”
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:25 AM
no response, no surprise.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Sin of Onan.
No, they repressed it.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 11:27 AM
of course you miss the point. its more than obvious you don’t have the intellect to grasp it.
its why I make you look foolish, and you’re too stupid to know how stupid you are.
ps: if it wasn’t for christians, slavery would still be worldwide….duhhhhhhh
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 11:28 AM
all your arguments can be applied to pedophilia too. or polygamy.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 11:28 AM
So the same applies when straight people suddenly decide they’re gay? Heterosexuals CAN “go gay,” and never look back. I’ve seen it happen.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 11:32 AM
I want you to talk to these people and then ask them if they “repressed” it. Because I know several people who were adamant about their homosexuality as teens/20-somethings who, as older adults now (30s & 40s) are not gay and are emphatically straight.
What a silly, ignorant comment.
englishqueen01 on July 29, 2010 at 11:36 AM
Sigh. Another moronic strawman argument. One more time:
The Bible, in the original Greek and Hebrew, does not define the term “sodomy” the same way a modern English dictionary does. In fact, I challenge you to find the word “sodomy” in any mainstream English translation of the Bible at all. Go ahead. Try.
The very term Sodomy, as I’m sure you’ll realize, is derived from the Biblical account of the town of Sodom in Genesis 19. The men of Sodom wanted to rape two angels (obviously they had no idea who they were.) No mention of oral sex here. Give it up; you will never be able to find evidence anywhere in the Bible that God views oral sex between an husband and wife as a sin.
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:36 AM
FAIL. His sin was refusing to bear a child for his dead brother (Genesis 38:8-9). Do you even look these things up before you misrepresent them? Explain to me how your example proves anything about oral sex…?
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM
I was talking about Borderline Personality Disorder and Gender Identity Disorder which have a strong linkage to environment (Parenting, development through childhood, society).
Yes, some homosexuals can be homosexual because of environment or trauma. Not all. Some are homosexual because their brains are wired that way, their brains respond to male pheromones the same way women do.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 11:41 AM
Thank you for once again proving my point that sexuality is a choice.
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:42 AM
Strawman? Ask commenters like platypus and Jenfidel and others why they keep using what you call a strawman, then, talking about the “Church of Sodomy” and “sodomites”. Not my fault that you’re arguing in the same fashion. You can tap dance around the definition of the word all you like, but it is what it is, and the definition was determined by Victorian-minded zealots who saw homosexuality little differently than you do.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 11:42 AM
And the point flies over your head like a 747.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 11:43 AM
That seems more like youthful experimentation than a life-long predisposition. I know plenty of people who have dabbled but that says little about their true orientation.
I do believe that some environmental factors can contribute in some cases, but, most homosexuals I’ve known have come from decent families, weren’t abused, and claim to have always been attracted to their gender.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 11:44 AM
I keep seeing “Beo” and think it’s me.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Same here, and I wonder what happened.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 11:48 AM
You’re like, “Why do you suck at everything all of a sudden and why do your pits stink? gad.”
ha.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Arousal often happens without intention. It is possible to measure chemical activity such as histamines and other neurotransmitters in advance of a conscious awareness of arousal.
dedalus on July 29, 2010 at 11:53 AM
Freud stated a bulk of this mess. He wanted a non biblical vocabulary and description of humans, behavior and causes with no reference to sin.
Bieber, et al., found a pattern of detached and/or hostile-detached fathers. They concluded that: “Profound interpersonal disturbance is unremitting in the homosexual father-son relationship. Not one of the fathers (of homosexual sons)… could be regarded as reasonably ‘normal’ parents’
A father is a guide in bringing a son to manhood. This step is missing in the gay male that grows older.
http://www.fathersforlife.org/dale/childhood_of_homosexual_men_2.htm
In a 1979 article Irving and Toby Bieber reported that in their evaluations of over 1,000 male homosexuals, they did not find one “whose father openly loved and respected him.” (Bieber, 1979)
Why do they lie and insist the boys were born gay?
seven on July 29, 2010 at 11:54 AM
Your argument:
Oral sex is sodomy (according to a dictionary).
Sodomy is sin (except the term is a modern one and doesn’t even appear in the Bible in any translation.)
Therefore oral sex is sin.
Dude. Do you really not see how it is a strawman to set up a modern definition of a term that doesn’t even appear in the Bible to make the Bible say something that it does not? Here, let’s use your dictionary:
“Strawman”:
2. a weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted [syn: straw man]
Madison, I’ve always had respect for your writings on here, but you’ve lost this one. Time to walk away from it.
Beo on July 29, 2010 at 11:58 AM
of course it is amusing that holger and madisonfascist ignore and cannot deal with the point about pedophilia…
no surprise!
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:01 PM
If it doesn’t appear in the Bible, explain the tendency of zealots, on this site and others, to focus on the term. Again, you’re claiming this is a strawman, but I didn’t make the assertion. Those who make the same arguments as you on this site did.
Perhaps the problem is one of differentiation. Others who typically take the same stance you’re taking regularly refer to sodomy as sin. The modern definition of the term(defined by Victorian-era Christians in order to punish others for doing acts they considered sinful) is, according to you, different than the Biblical meaning(which is odd, considering that you point out that the word “sodomy” is not in the Bible). Do you reject the modern definition as being sinful?
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 12:08 PM
That’s because one involves kids and one doesn’t. Now shut up and go away, you puddle of vomit.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM
Wasting Seed is no longer a Sin? I didn’t get the memo.
And you are one of the first Christians I’ve seen point out what that passage in Genesis really means, an act of rape.
Did you also know the Sodomites and Gomorrans didn’t help the poor. In fact, they enjoyed tormenting the poor. They had this game, they’d give marked gold to beggars, the mark being their name. Shopkeepers would see the marked gold and not sell food. And when the beggar died of starvation, those who gave the beggar gold would go to his body and collect the gold they gave him to give to the next beggar.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 12:10 PM
Because that isn’t the link most people make when discussing sex acts between consenting adults, nor is it pertinent to the topic at hand.
Yes, the term came from the town Sodom and the city wasn’t merely known for homosexuality but of lascivious acts of all kinds. The term itself is a modern derivative meaning any “unnatural” sex acts between any persons including oral sex.
By the way, did you know that some interpretations of SoS indicate anal sex? Just curious.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Hey right4life. My cousins were sexually abused by a step-father, the step-father was a church-goer, he was a heterosexual. He had kids of his own, which the SOB didn’t abuse.
That is why you fail constantly. Whenever someone likes you comes along and equates pedophilia to homosexuality, I am reminded that it was a fine, upstanding, Christian heterosexual male who molested children.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 12:15 PM
I’ve seen it too. Four that I personally know…all happy and at peace with God..all but one is married and in delightfully transparent relationships.
LEBA on July 29, 2010 at 12:16 PM
again you show your stupidity.
who determines what the age of consent is?
who determines whether its a crime or not?
we do obviously
duhhhhhhhhh
you pathetic moron.
you can’t deal with the issue because it blows your whole ‘gay is ok’ argument out of the water.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:18 PM
the point, which you are incapable of getting, is that if homosexuality is just a lifestyle choice, then so is pedophilia…and the arguments you make supporting homosexuality, and gay marriage, can be made for pedophilia.
and saying ‘its illegal’ or ‘kids are involved’ is just a fiction…when we as a society determine what is legal, and what the age of consent is.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:19 PM
yes its very pertinent…if homosexuality is ok, and gay marriage is fine, then why not pedophilia, why not polygamy/polyandry?
after all those are just lifestyle choices too!
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:20 PM
where do you get this at? the book of holger?
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:22 PM
And the point that cannot get through your brain which has been turned to mush by your religion is that one is an act between consenting adults. The other is victimization of the innocent. They are two radically different things.
You are attempting to equivocate consensual sex with rape, attempting to make them morally equal.
Let me guess, no means yes right? Go back to Westboro Baptist.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 12:23 PM
We as a society have determined that homosexuality is legal, and that sex with kids is not. Funny how you miss that.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 12:26 PM
Careful, careful, CAREFUL! Show me conclusive, scientific evidence. …”..because their brains are wired that way…” Really? Really?? The only marginal research I’ve heard of in the recent few years points to the increase in frequency of male babies born with low testosterone. But even there no correlation has been made to connect that ‘dot’ with future homosexuality.
What credible physical evidence (research) exists that shows that a homosexual brain is ‘wired differently’ than a heterosexual brain?
LEBA on July 29, 2010 at 12:26 PM
Age of consent is a biological determination…based on sexual maturity. (Sure, this has been rather oddly defined, culture by culture.) But, we get it pretty right here, I think.
Once you’ve settled the age of consent, the rest is private sexual practices between adults. I might not agree with it but it’s their prerogative. It’s not a “lifestyle choice” to abuse someone old or young without their consent…that’s criminal activity which should be pretty clear.
And pedophilia isn’t limited to gays, dear. Christian churches and schools are rife with such abuse and rightly punished.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 12:31 PM
There is nothing in the Bible which prohibits any kind of consensual sex between a husband and wife. Onan’s sin was refusing his duty to father a child for his deceased brother. That a culture choose to label the act of oral sex as “sodomy” does not make it a sin as the Bible never prohibits oral sex between husband and wife. Using the term Soddomite is different to the extent it refers to someone committing the sin of the Biblical city of Sodom. The sin of Sodom was homosexualilty and the text of Genesis 19 and the Book of Jude make this very clear.
tommyboy on July 29, 2010 at 12:32 PM
I have argued with you, and I have called out your bigotry. I have not, however, ever stated that I want gay marriage.
Sin is disobedience of God. Christians know when they’re doing that and when they’re not. That’s the purpose of the Holy Spirit.
That’s my position on homosexuality.
I’m not. I’m not even for marriage as it relates to the government. I’d rather the entire system were completely dismantled.
But then, you’ve asked me those two questions multiple times before and obviously didn’t pay attention last time.
You know me so well. I’m just like a white person.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Yeah, I chose to be gay………………what BS.
SC.Charlie on July 29, 2010 at 12:33 PM
the pedophiles would argue that its good for children, and they have their consent.
so once you reach some magic age, anything goes!!! nice.
well sweety I never said it was…duhhhhh
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:33 PM
really?
you get all this….
from that????
please…
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:34 PM
Poor wording. Meant to say that heterosexuals in every walk of life have also abused children, recent cases having been pastors and educators.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 12:35 PM
nice dodge. so its not a sin as long as you don’t think it is!!! sweet!!
the I’m personally opposed to abortion, but….argument….nice….
laughable.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:36 PM
again, the pedophile would argue that it is consensual…and it is not rape. and it is very bigoted of you to disagree with them!!
they are not radically different things. they are a behavior…and if homosexuality is ok, then obviously any other type of sexuality is too!
you try to draw arbitrary lines…when there are none…the same arguments you make for homosexuality can be made for pedophilia…and they do make them for pedophilia…its just a lifestyle choice….its good for kids…its consensual…yadayada…
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:39 PM
homosexuality used to be illegal…we can turn around as a society and say pedophilia is fine..
funny you missed that…not surprising giving your intellect.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 12:40 PM
…and summarily be incarcerated.
“Do all you’ve promised to do (honor your contracts) and do not encroach on another person’s property (respect laws and individuals)” is a simple maxim which helps define how I live, aside from my faith. So, yes, if you’re an adult, your sexuality should be no business of mine as much as mine shouldn’t be of yours. Nor should it be the government’s business. It’s your own and God’s.
You brought it up and given your previous statements, I naturally assumed you thought one came from the other. Not the first time I’ve heard that argument made.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 12:41 PM
It never was a sin. As others have said, his sin wasn’t in pulling out but in having sex with a woman who intended to have his child (and had sex with him for no other reason) but then deciding after the fact that he wasn’t going to fulfill his obligation.
It’s like the story of the man who paid a neighbor to impregnate his wife only to later learn, after he’d paid the guy for a few “sessions” that the man was snipped. Only, there’s all the cultural and religious implications of helping out your dead brother’s wife.
Yes, and they were also so evil that Lot thought he could keep them from raping the angels by giving them his virgin daughters, and he’s evil enough for even offering them. His daughters were evil enough for getting him drunk later on and having their way with him.
It was a messed up place, unbelievably so, and yet, sodomy is the English word for unnatural sex, because that’s what most people remember.
That said, Beo’s right in that it’s not a biblical term. The Bible never says not to commit sodomy or not to have oral or anal. It never goes in to specific sex acts that are prohibited. In fact, in Leviticus where most of that is covered, it just tells you who you can’t have sex with or when you can’t have sex (when a woman is on her period).
That’s something that others have said, and those are laws that others passed specifically to punish homosexuals, without thinking about the fact that they like it too.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 12:43 PM
They have done several experiments and there are several observations.
With Ferrets and Rats, they damaged the brain of straight rats and ferrets in a certain area (Anterior portion of the hypothalmus) and it caused them to be attracted to male ferrets and rats. And they dosed female rats and ferrets with testosterone at a certain developmental stage and they acted masculine for the rest of their life.
With feline gestation, a female lion that gestates between two male lions turns out to act more masculine.
Now, with Humans, they have found several things. One is that the mothers of straight males have 2.3 children and the mothers of homosexual males have 2.7 children. This explains why homosexuality, if genetic, is still around, it is on the X Chromosome and not on the Y Chromosome. Women are have two X Chromosomes and men are one X and one Y.
Genetics also explains how identical twins can be straight and gay (which we see), portions of genetic code can get turned off by a process called Methylation.
They have also found correlation between chance of being gay and order of child birth. If a woman has given birth to 14 sons the 14 son has a 50 percent chance of being gay. It may be hormonal balance during gestation or it may be her own body reacting to the presence of XY DNA which is completely foreign to her body. Similar to organ rejection where the body rejects DNA not its own.
They have also examined the brain under MRI and CAT Scan and found portions of the gay male’s hypothalmus are different than those same portions of the straight male’s hypothalmus and has more in common with portions of the female hypothalmus. And when stimulated with male sweat, the gay brain activates in a similar pattern to the female brain.
I posted a discover magazine link, the article had the names of the scientists, you can probably find their papers on the studies that way.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 12:46 PM
Thanks for the correction.
That’s not what I said, but you don’t seem to be able to read me without putting in your own bias, so I’ll just leave it at that.
Of course abortion harms someone other than the individual having it, whereas homosexuality hurts no innocent bystanders, but go with whatever works for you. Obviously you’re doing great here, and you don’t even need my responses.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 12:48 PM
Oh, you want specifically where I learned that practice.
They were really perverted, rape doesn’t even cover it.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Also worth noting that much of this was health code specfically for the Hebrews and not at all prescriptive for the Church in toto.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Because legally children can’t consent.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Does ASU force engineering grads to take “sensitivity” classes to cope with the flannel shirt, mullet wearing lesbians on a job site?
I suspect this is an isolated attack on a single student.
Vee Vill not tolerate intolerance.
seven on July 29, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Yes, like the meat restrictions. I still find it a bit funny, as I wouldn’t think they’d need to make it a law, especially in a time before indoor plumbing.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 12:54 PM
I meant that pedophiles can define maturity and age of consent all they want but because we recognize legal consent at a certain age, violators go to jail.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 12:56 PM
Not true at all. Israel was the son of Abraham. The law was 400 years later. God had the law presented after Israel was delivered from Egypt. So we know why the sodomites were destroyed.
1KINGS 15:11 And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father. 1KINGS 15:12 And he took away the sodomites out of the land and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.
seven on July 29, 2010 at 12:58 PM
Right, I was just continuing that thought, not correcting you.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 12:59 PM
Yes, like the meat restrictions. I still find it a bit funny, as I wouldn’t think they’d need to make it a law, especially in a time before indoor plumbing.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 12:54 PM
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM
But it isn’t. Pedophilia is. I know, it’s hard for you to get that through the fecal matter serving as your cerebellum.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 1:01 PM
Reverse that block quote.
What’s wrong with me today? Gahh.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:01 PM
You have some?
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 1:02 PM
Only one but planning my second. I love them.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:03 PM
ACA will lose.
Sultry Beauty on July 29, 2010 at 1:05 PM
If any of your claims were true, we could show scans to Docs and by looking at the scans, they could tell us which were gay. They can’t
The “sweat” reaction? That is a joke
It is a learned Pavlovian conditioned response. You can google scholar anything you want and still be wrong.
Obviously identical twin studies where 1 is gay, only half the time the other is gay. But both always have the same skin color.
seven on July 29, 2010 at 1:11 PM
I got three.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM
I’ve thought about getting one, but I’d only want one that really meant something to me and so far haven’t found anything.
I met one person though who instead of wearing wedding rings had his tattooed on, as did his wife (they’re in a band). I really liked the concept behind it, that the ring is always there and seriously considered it with the idea that I’d also have a real ring so that I could cover the tattoo up for work, but that last part made it a little silly.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 1:16 PM
Though with some twins, one is left-handed and the other right-handed. Neither is making an informed choice.
dedalus on July 29, 2010 at 1:16 PM
If a homosexual teen comes to her for advise, can she give the teen the standard of care required in her profession? Or, will she just condemn the teen and hand the teen a bible?
SC.Charlie on July 29, 2010 at 1:18 PM
What of? I’ve held off only because it’s a serious deal for me but I absolutely love them and am so impressed by the artistry. (I have an approx. 5 in. celtic cross on my shoulder blade.)
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:18 PM
Christians are certainly capable of doing the former, but it doesn’t appear as though this woman was given a chance to do that.
Esthier on July 29, 2010 at 1:23 PM
Ok, I really would like to know how they will graduate and certify Muslims. My understanding is that Gay behavior goes against Muslim. Don’t they stone Gays in some middle eastern countries? Just curious.
scottjenn on July 29, 2010 at 1:23 PM
I like the wedding band idea.
I definitely understand about choosing one with meaning, hence my hesitation to get more. I got mine at the tender age of 18. ha. I’m just glad that my subsequent “experimentation” with atheism didn’t stick. :)
It’s definitely an art, though, and amazing to watch them work.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:25 PM
No it is not, it is no different than Bucks being attracted to the scent of a Doe in Heat.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 1:27 PM
Norse religious symbols, Aegishalmur, valknot and a valkyrie.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 1:29 PM
I’ve never heard of a Christian counselor “condemning” a teen but nothing precludes giving her a bible and conforming to the standard of care. They are not mutually exclusive.
tommyboy on July 29, 2010 at 1:40 PM
It is not a standard in the Christian community to not accept a person for being gay.
SC.Charlie on July 29, 2010 at 1:40 PM
Nothing here suggested she behaved improperly to a patient, professors merely predicted that she would, at some future date, based on the content of her constitutionally protected free speech.
Is it a wrong that leads to revocation of license to proclaim such views before taking on a patient, and give the patient the freedom to choose another counselor?
I’m guessing that’s OK, so professors are going way beyond any reasonable mandate under ethical guidelines.
It’s as if law professors impeded the graduation of students who support conservative views of gay rights, abortion, healthcare mandates.
Anil Petra on July 29, 2010 at 1:42 PM
I know of no such standard of care one way or the other in this regard in the Christian community. It would depend entirely on whether the individual counselor felt competant to treat the specific gay person in question. Certainly there would be nothing wrong with referring any given patient to another therapist.
tommyboy on July 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM
you stupid piece of trash, the same arguments that legalized homosexuality can be used to legalize pedophilia…
you pathetic little moron.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM
Wrong. In the profession the standard of care for people who have a homosexual orientation is acceptance. The other issues that you bring up are not.
SC.Charlie on July 29, 2010 at 1:56 PM
your own words show that is what you said…
how do christians KNOW this? hmmm?? just a feeling…whatever society says? please. its been rather clear what is and is not a sin for the last 2 millenia….
obviously it does…haven’t you read Kurtz’s research on gay marriage in the netherlands??
but people like you don’t care what happens to children, or society…its all about teh gays and what they want..
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 1:58 PM
so anything goes nice…who cares about the religious freedom of others…the gays are imposing a sharia law on this country…and freedom to disagree with them, or practice your religion in anyway that offends them will vanish.
to say nothing of gay marriage does to marriage itself…but its always been the agenda of the left to destroy the family
its amusing to see so-called ‘conservatives’ to agree with it.
because any argument you make for homosexual ‘rights’ can be made for pedophia ‘rights’ .
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 2:02 PM
So homosexuality was legalized by arguing that there should be no age of consent?
Oh. No, it wasn’t. Keep trying, dickless.
MadisonConservative on July 29, 2010 at 2:08 PM
No, it does not. Children cannot give consent, adults can. That is the distinction between homosexuality and pedophilia which you are incapable of understanding. You are arguing that legalizing an act between consenting adults would legalize rape, it can’t.
Holger on July 29, 2010 at 2:09 PM
oh and no surprise that you cannot call homosexuality a sin…you have the same morality as the world…gee that takes courage (right)
as you prove yet again, you have your own gospel of esthier…you are your own little god…so when you pray, you must pray to yourself…because the god you say you serve, sure is not the God of the Bible.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 2:10 PM
and what is the age of consent? it used to be 21…now its 18…its an ARBITRARY NUMBER…
and we can change it whenever we want.
get a clue.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 2:11 PM
you sure are obsessed with my sexuality, no surprise. its called projection loser.
given that that is the argument of NAMBLA…which is part of the gay rights movement…
name a hetero organization that is equivalent…
but of course since homosexuality is just an alternative lifestyle…why isn’t pedophilia?
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 2:12 PM
I don’t dispute that there has been effort by the left (largely philosophical) to dismantle the traditional family unit. In fact, read one of my posts on anonymous sperm donation for reference. I’m speaking strictly of sexual practices between adults in their own homes, whether I agree with them or not. How do you suggest we legislate that behavior without seriously damaging other freedoms we all enjoy?
Make the argument. I want to see it logically posited without snark, then. Seriously.
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 2:13 PM
what other ‘rights’ do homosexuals need? they are one of the richest minorities around…they have their will imposed upon others, like this poor girl.
its gotten to the point where any viewpoint that doesn’t agree with the homosexual one is soon to be illegal.
they have more rights than heteros do now…especially if you are a christian.
right4life on July 29, 2010 at 2:16 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 Next »