Gay Rights Gestapo Targets Small Christian College: Any Liberals Here Find This Troubling?

[bodecea]

And now, from neutral sources that give a little more detail that the dolt Mile Griffith provides:

Gordon College maintains ban on homosexual practice creates human sexuality task force InsideHigherEd.com

Agency to review whether Gordon College s antigay stance policies violate accrediting standards - Metro - The Boston Globe

You are being ignored in favor of a good RW rant, you know.

 

[JoeB131]

You insult 3 billion people with your post, but are offended when somebody refers to ****** as a ******.
Actually, not only you, but all of your ilk.

Probably only about 2 billion people who believe in Zombie on a Stick, but that wasn't my point.

My point is, why are we still clinging to Bronze Age superstitions?

 

[JoeB131]

In other words, because you disagree with their beliefs, you don't think they deserve their basic constitutional rights, and any attempt by them to uphold their standards on their campus is somehow "discrimination."

As gay rights activist Andrew Sullivan notes, if this effort against Gordon College succeeds, this will shred any semblance of freedom of religion.

You and your fellows are neo-NAZIs when it comes to the rights of people whose values you reject. You have no respect, no tolerance, no basic common courtesy when it comes to people of faith. And it just shows how far off the wing-nut edge some liberals have gone.

Next you guys will seek to force private religious schools to hire gay faculty members and to ban religious schools from teaching what the Bible says about homosexuality and marriage.

The point is, they gave up their right to discriminate when they opened the doors to all faiths with enough money to pay tuition.

A college isn't a church.

Oh, I went to Catholic schools in the 1970's. We already had faculty that were as queer as square donuts. They called them "Nuns" and "Priests". today we let them live their lives and not join silly religious orders. It really does work better.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They're objecting to losing state accreditation. Problem is, if you want such accreditation, FROM A GOVERNMENT,

then you're becoming part of the government. You're asking for a government benefit. Therefore you've obligated yourself to comply with the government requirements for qualifying for such a government benefit.

 

[BluesLegend]

They're objecting to losing state accreditation. Problem is, if you want such accreditation, FROM A GOVERNMENT,

then you're becoming part of the government. You're asking for a government benefit. Therefore you've obligated yourself to comply with the government requirements for qualifying for such a government benefit.

The People are the governments boss, it does whatever the hell we tell it to do. And since when is keeping your own damn money a government "benefit" you liberals have some pretty creepy ideas.

 

[Katzndogz]

This should come as no surprise. Gays pay for their children to go to catholic school and then complain about the religious teaching.

 

[2aguy]

All part of trying to appear "normal" and mainstream. Sick bastids, homos are mental

This post above is a perfect example of why the bigots need to be beaten into submission by every legal means available.

Just wait.....when you surrender freedom because you don't like the group that wants it now......one day you will be a member of the group that wants your freedom respected...and I will laugh when it isn't......

 

[2aguy]

“Naturally, this raises the pregnant question of why an openly gay person would try to attend a private evangelical/Bible-believing college in the first place.”

Wrong.

The compelling question is why should an openly gay person be unwelcome to attend the College, given the fact that the vast majority of gay Americans are Christian, as nowhere is there a consensus in Christian doctrine or dogma that homosexuality must be condemned as a 'sin.'

Refusing to allow gay students attend is based on unwarranted fear and hate, not 'religion.'

Moreover, in the context of private society, and in the context of a free and democratic society, absent government and the courts – in this case a private college in conflict with private citizens – the issue of 'rights' does not come into play; private citizens are at liberty to speak out in opposition to the policies of Gordon College, where the College's 'rights' are in no way being 'violated.' No one is advocating a 'law' be enacted 'compelling' the College to accommodate gay students, nor is anyone seeking to undermine the College's right to free association.

Not only is this conflict not 'troubling,' but it should be encouraged, as the people alone are perfectly capable of resolving such issues without government interfering. Indeed, this was the Framers' intent when they created our Constitutional Republic: to safeguard a free and democratic society – where the conflicts and controversies of the day can be resolved by the people themselves, absent the need for government or the courts to become involved.

Consequently, this issue has nothing to do with 'liberals,' it has more to do with how uncomfortable most conservatives are with dissent and conflict in a free and democratic society.

Again...wrong....

Refusing to allow gay students attend is based on unwarranted fear and hate, not 'religion.'

That isn't what they say...it is married gays that cause the religious question........

 

[Deleted member 53821]

i'm troubled that we still have colleges dedicated to an imaginary zombie nailed to a stick.

Beyond that, no, I don't care that much. I don't think religion should be used as an excuse for discrimination. This college lost it's argument when it hired or enrolled people not of their faith for the money.

Unless it is Islam. Then women must wear a veil.... Islamic colleges are alloyed to "discriminate" and have the right tomexcercise their religion anywhere they want. Christians do not. Even though I believe in equality I only mean it economically not with respect to ones own government. This way GOVERNMENT can discriminate against anyone it wants. I hope you understand my position perfectly.

 

[FA_Q2]

And now, from neutral sources that give a little more detail that the dolt Mile Griffith provides:

Gordon College maintains ban on homosexual practice creates human sexuality task force InsideHigherEd.com

Agency to review whether Gordon College s antigay stance policies violate accrediting standards - Metro - The Boston Globe

You are being ignored in favor of a good RW rant, you know.

Ignored? How?

The central point still stands.

 

[JFK_USA]

i'm troubled that we still have colleges dedicated to an imaginary zombie nailed to a stick.

Beyond that, no, I don't care that much. I don't think religion should be used as an excuse for discrimination. This college lost it's argument when it hired or enrolled people not of their faith for the money.

100% correct. Stop being bigoted assholes. If they meet your admission standards, you let them in regardless of their sexual orientation. Maybe the college has a program that they want to study that is close to their home. They want to study there and if they did everything they could to be admitted and then once admitted, were told they can't be gay and go to school. That's wrong in the land of the free.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Typical Rushbo Mirror Statement by mikegriffiths: accuse your opponents of doing what you are doing. The heterofascists are the enemies of American on this issue.

"You and your fellows are neo-NAZIs when it comes to the rights of people whose values you reject. "

 

[JakeStarkey]

If a college takes any federal money, including the GI bill, the college is toast.

 

[Katzndogz]

Of course liberals don't find it troubling. Muslim jihadists don't find beheading troubling. The gay jihad won't find this troubling for the same reasons.

 

[Preacher]

The school needs to go after the gay group and start with civil suits and every legal action available rather than pouting and standing around in a defensive posture.

EXACTLY! Stop waiting around for the faggots to harm you strike first! What the hell is wrong with this college! Hell we can raise almost 1 million dollars for a business attacked by faggots but we can't force them to back off with their threats to normal society!? I don't buy it.

 

[mikegriffith1]

If you liberals insist on using the term "discrimination" when a religious vendor merely declines to host or service a ceremony that they find offensive, then, once again, should we not also claim "discrimination":

* If a photographer who happens to be a 70s-era hippie who views marriage as an archaic, oppressive institution objects to servicing a gay wedding, even though his objection has no religious basis and even though his policy is not to photograph any weddings whatsoever? (Of course, we all know that no gay couple would even consider suing the hippie or getting him prosecuted. They reserve their hateful revenge for religious vendors.)

* If a Muslim baker in Europe refuses to bake a cake for the "commitment ceremony" for a 60-year-old man and a 13-year-old girl who's about to shack up with the old pervert and whose parents have consented to her doing so?

* If an Orthodox Jewish florist refuses to do the flower arrangement at a pre-orgy dinner held by a swinger group, especially since the florist would not have to stay for the orgy nor see anyone undress, etc., etc.? Shouldn't his desire not to facilitate an event that he finds morally offensive be overruled by the swinger group's "right" to this "basic service"?

* If a gay printer objects to printing a booklet for a Christian seminar on the health risks of homosexuality?

* If a secular baker who believes in traditional values objects to baking a cake for a gay wedding, even though his objection isn't based on any religious beliefs but just on his personal opinion that same-sex marriage isn't good for society?

Using the same logic that liberals keep using, all of these vendors would be guilty of "discrimination."

 

[NYcarbineer]

They're objecting to losing state accreditation. Problem is, if you want such accreditation, FROM A GOVERNMENT,

then you're becoming part of the government. You're asking for a government benefit. Therefore you've obligated yourself to comply with the government requirements for qualifying for such a government benefit.

The People are the governments boss, it does whatever the hell we tell it to do. And since when is keeping your own damn money a government "benefit" you liberals have some pretty creepy ideas.

School accreditation is a government benefit.

If it's so important for this school to persecute gay people then they can continue as a non-accredited school.

There many such schools around.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If your institution receives government money, you cannot discriminate against others of not your belief.

Give up the money, dudes.

 

[BluesLegend]

They're objecting to losing state accreditation. Problem is, if you want such accreditation, FROM A GOVERNMENT,

then you're becoming part of the government. You're asking for a government benefit. Therefore you've obligated yourself to comply with the government requirements for qualifying for such a government benefit.

The People are the governments boss, it does whatever the hell we tell it to do. And since when is keeping your own damn money a government "benefit" you liberals have some pretty creepy ideas.

School accreditation is a government benefit.

If it's so important for this school to persecute gay people then they can continue as a non-accredited school.

There many such schools around.

Ahahaha are you seriously going to try defending the government accreditation, have you seen the idiots these schools are churning out as graduates?

 

[ogibillm]

They're objecting to losing state accreditation. Problem is, if you want such accreditation, FROM A GOVERNMENT,

then you're becoming part of the government. You're asking for a government benefit. Therefore you've obligated yourself to comply with the government requirements for qualifying for such a government benefit.

The People are the governments boss, it does whatever the hell we tell it to do. And since when is keeping your own damn money a government "benefit" you liberals have some pretty creepy ideas.

School accreditation is a government benefit.

If it's so important for this school to persecute gay people then they can continue as a non-accredited school.

There many such schools around.

The neasc isn't government. They are an independent regional accrediting body, and they set their own standards for accreditation. If they say Gordon College doesn't meet those standards, that's that.