Tolerance? Not for Christians...

[Coyote]

What training, exactly, did Keeton fail at?

Oh, wait. She didn't. They just assume she will because she's a Christian.

She's the only Christian in the program?

I'm sure ASU is graduating plenty of Christians in the counseling program this year.

They must be slipping then...

 

[Sky Dancer]

Universities Can Ban Students Who Refuse To Treat Gay Patients As Normal Human Beings: Judge

Read more: Universities Can Ban Students Who Refuse To Treat Gay Patients As Normal Human Beings: Judge / Queerty

 

[AllieBaba]

She never refused to treat gays as human beings, Sky. Not once. She said everybody is a sinner, and included herself in that analogy.

 

[Sky Dancer]

In the suit, Keeton maintains that the instructors ordered her to “change her beliefs” on the topic of homosexuality. Sources at ASU simply claim the women did no such thing.

What they reportedly did do is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

ASU will maintain in their answer to the lawsuit that all Keeton’s instructors did was demonstrate their concern that her Christian views on homosexuality were not germane to the counseling tasks at hand, and that, in fact, offering solutions based on the counselor’s religious beliefs run contrary to the professional code of ethics all graduate students in counseling must embrace in order to receive a diploma. (That is the rule of the American Counseling Association’s Code of Ethics, and it is a constant nationwide.)

The bottom line is that Schenck and Anderson-Wiley refute Keeton’s version of events. ASU has never taken a stand where they urge any student to “change their beliefs” nor would they.

Of course, a disagreement between a student and teachers over what was said in class or in a meeting does not make a sexy, headline-grabbing story. A Southern university ordering a God-fearing young student to embrace the ways of Sodom and Gomorrah or face expulsion, now that will have the folks on the Fox News Sunday show couch all excited.

I have a very conservative track record, and I have always defended those who are persecuted unjustly for their legitimate religious beliefs, as long as they are legal. I also have a very well-known distaste for education bureaucracies and the way they tend to steamroll past common sense in the effort to cover their behinds in the midst of a controversy.

I don’t believe we have either scenario playing out here, and in due time that case will be made. The university and its people did nothing wrong, and Keeton’s concern is an overreaction, a misunderstanding based on their instruction to her to change her approach with clients in the workplace, not her personal beliefs.

If ASU or its employees were really as “anti-Christian,” as the ADF attorneys would have you believe, in Augusta, they would have a helluva lot more people fighting them than just Jennifer Keeton. I would be one of them.
Metro Spirit: Austin Rhodes - ASU lawsuit may not have a prayer

 

[AllieBaba]

Nice, Sky. A hack job on the ADF.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Nice, Sky. A hack job on the ADF.

Is the ADF mentioned in the article? I didn't see it.

 

[AllieBaba]

You should read the article.

It's just an opinion piece. It doesn't prove anything except one person's opinion about the situation.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I read the article. The writer has some inside sources at ASU. She was asked to withhold her biblical opinion in a hypoethical counseling situation.

"In the suit, Keeton maintains that the instructors ordered her to “change her beliefs” on the topic of homosexuality. Sources at ASU simply claim the women did no such thing.

What they reportedly did do is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

ASU will maintain in their answer to the lawsuit that all Keeton’s instructors did was demonstrate their concern that her Christian views on homosexuality were not germane to the counseling tasks at hand, and that, in fact, offering solutions based on the counselor’s religious beliefs run contrary to the professional code of ethics all graduate students in counseling must embrace in order to receive a diploma. (That is the rule of the American Counseling Association’s Code of Ethics, and it is a constant nationwide.)"

From the article below

 

[Coyote]

The article is a good one, but ADF is mentioned, particularly interestingly in it's method of getting around the "gag order" imposed by the judge.

 

[Sky Dancer]

The article is a good one, but ADF is mentioned, particularly interestingly in it's method of getting around the "gag order" imposed by the judge.

You're right. It's in the part of the article I didn't copy and paste to post.

 

[Sky Dancer]

"Christian Right legal firms like the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) have evolved a partly successful strategy of lawsuits to propagate religion and religious views, especially in public schools. While their positions sometimes have (legal) merit, there are many occasions where they don't. Their courtroom strategy is sometimes indirect/passive (e.g., amicus curiae briefs, which they often use in Supreme Court religion cases of interest to them) and sometimes direct/active (via funding or providing counsel to try lawsuits, which they do more often in the lower Federal Courts). Their success in the lower courts (which decide the vast majority of cases in the country) has been highest when they have argued the Free Speech angle in their religion lawsuits (and lowest when they used the Establishment clause). This may explain why ADF's lawsuit against the CUSD on behalf of teacher Stephen Williams partly invokes the Free Speech clause to defend the teacher's actions (in addition to the Establishment clause and the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection clause).

By the admission of some of the Christian Right legal firms, they achieve most of their goals via off-courtroom activities. This includes (among other things):

(a) public relations and (sometimes fake) propaganda via a helpful mainstream media and Christian/right-wing networks,
(b) so-called public "education" campaigns using bulletins, letters or notices to public organizations like schools, and,
(c) threats of lawsuits

Based on the information presented in this page, in the separate Cupertino lawsuit analysis, and this Commonweal Institute report, important lessons can be learnt by teachers, parents and public school districts (and other public organizations). If you are a public school and you receive a threat of a lawsuit or an "education" bulletin from Christian Right legal firms, do not assume that everything they claim is correct or legal. These groups (and their appendages in the media) have a history of fabricating myths or distorting the facts or presenting selective, misleading information. Just because lawsuits arguing the Free Speech clause have provided the Christian Right with greater success, it doesn't automatically mean that a Free Speech argument has legal merit. This line of legal attack has historically been more successful in cases where off-classroom religious activities are involved, and less successful when in-classroom activities are involved (which always risk the implication of the school's endorsement of religion - something that the Supreme Court has repeatedly scorned at). The Stevens Creek Elementary School lawsuit (partially argued using the Free Speech clause) not only falls in the latter category but is also characterized by the teacher using bogus and highly slanted documents. As such, it is a frivolous lawsuit that is extraordinarily weak on the legal merits.

The Christian Right and its extended network has a historically rich track record of trying to discredit and destroy public education and teachers unions. The religion in schools angle is just one of many in their assault on public education. It would be foolish to take their attacks lying down. "
eRiposte - Fundamentalism in the United States: A Brief Summary of the Christian Right in the U.S. Court system

 

[Sky Dancer]

"ADF founders, which included James Dobson, Donald Wildmon, the late Bill Bright and the late D. James Kennedy, originally conceived the organization as a funding pool that would finance legal cases brought by other groups that advanced the Religious Right’s view in the courts.

This strategy was employed for a few years, but the ADF now directly litigates cases itself and is headed by Alan Sears, formerly an anti-pornography crusader in the Edwin Meese-era Justice Department. The ADF is rigidly anti-gay and promotes its fundamentalist Christian vision in public schools and government institutions.

A flavor of Sears’ views can be found in the titles of the books he has co-authored: The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today (2003) and The ACLU vs. America (2005). Sears is so concerned about the “homosexual agenda” that he once opined that the cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants might be part of a gay plot to indoctrinate children."

Outside of court, the ADF has worked to lure evangelical churches into a vast right-wing political machine. It sponsors “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” a ploy to openly defy federal tax law by encouraging pastors to endorse or oppose candidates from the pulpit. (While the ADF claims to be nonpartisan, all the project’s participating clergy in 2008 endorsed Republican John McCain or opposed Democrat Barack Obama.) The drive sparked a backlash from a group of Ohio clergy and tax law experts, who asked the IRS to investigate ADF lawyers on ethics grounds for urging churches to violate tax law. Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed a number of reports with the IRS detailing the egregious violations of the tax code that were committed by churches that joined the ADF effort.
Alliance Defense Fund | Americans United

 

[Againsheila]

good question.

now why would someone who can't do their training as a counselor demand they be made a counselor?

What training, exactly, did Keeton fail at?

Oh, wait. She didn't. They just assume she will because she's a Christian.

Diversity training. She refused to take it.

If it's not required of ALL the students, why should it be required for her? Again, she's being treated differently because she's a Christian. It's against the law. This is a public school.

BTW, one of the things they want to require her to do is attend a gay pride parade. That's already been ruled unethical when a fire department forced their firemen to be in a Gay Pride parade and the firemen claimed they were harassed by the gays.

Why should anyone be required to attend a gay pride parade? Heck, the gays I know wouldn't go near one.

 

[Sky Dancer]

What training, exactly, did Keeton fail at?

Oh, wait. She didn't. They just assume she will because she's a Christian.

Diversity training. She refused to take it.

If it's not required of ALL the students, why should it be required for her? Again, she's being treated differently because she's a Christian. It's against the law. This is a public school.

BTW, one of the things they want to require her to do is attend a gay pride parade. That's already been ruled unethical when a fire department forced their firemen to be in a Gay Pride parade and the firemen claimed they were harassed by the gays.

Why should anyone be required to attend a gay pride parade? Heck, the gays I know wouldn't go near one.

I've only been to one Pride parade in my life. I went at at time when to be openly gay was an act of great bravery.

 

[Againsheila]

In the suit, Keeton maintains that the instructors ordered her to “change her beliefs” on the topic of homosexuality. Sources at ASU simply claim the women did no such thing.

What they reportedly did do is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

ASU will maintain in their answer to the lawsuit that all Keeton’s instructors did was demonstrate their concern that her Christian views on homosexuality were not germane to the counseling tasks at hand, and that, in fact, offering solutions based on the counselor’s religious beliefs run contrary to the professional code of ethics all graduate students in counseling must embrace in order to receive a diploma. (That is the rule of the American Counseling Association’s Code of Ethics, and it is a constant nationwide.)

The bottom line is that Schenck and Anderson-Wiley refute Keeton’s version of events. ASU has never taken a stand where they urge any student to “change their beliefs” nor would they.

Of course, a disagreement between a student and teachers over what was said in class or in a meeting does not make a sexy, headline-grabbing story. A Southern university ordering a God-fearing young student to embrace the ways of Sodom and Gomorrah or face expulsion, now that will have the folks on the Fox News Sunday show couch all excited.

I have a very conservative track record, and I have always defended those who are persecuted unjustly for their legitimate religious beliefs, as long as they are legal. I also have a very well-known distaste for education bureaucracies and the way they tend to steamroll past common sense in the effort to cover their behinds in the midst of a controversy.

I don’t believe we have either scenario playing out here, and in due time that case will be made. The university and its people did nothing wrong, and Keeton’s concern is an overreaction, a misunderstanding based on their instruction to her to change her approach with clients in the workplace, not her personal beliefs.

If ASU or its employees were really as “anti-Christian,” as the ADF attorneys would have you believe, in Augusta, they would have a helluva lot more people fighting them than just Jennifer Keeton. I would be one of them.
Metro Spirit: Austin Rhodes - ASU lawsuit may not have a prayer

I'm confused, if all they did was express their concern, why the diversity training? Is that a lie? If not, then the profs are lying now.

 

[Sky Dancer]

In the suit, Keeton maintains that the instructors ordered her to “change her beliefs” on the topic of homosexuality. Sources at ASU simply claim the women did no such thing.

What they reportedly did do is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

ASU will maintain in their answer to the lawsuit that all Keeton’s instructors did was demonstrate their concern that her Christian views on homosexuality were not germane to the counseling tasks at hand, and that, in fact, offering solutions based on the counselor’s religious beliefs run contrary to the professional code of ethics all graduate students in counseling must embrace in order to receive a diploma. (That is the rule of the American Counseling Association’s Code of Ethics, and it is a constant nationwide.)

The bottom line is that Schenck and Anderson-Wiley refute Keeton’s version of events. ASU has never taken a stand where they urge any student to “change their beliefs” nor would they.

Of course, a disagreement between a student and teachers over what was said in class or in a meeting does not make a sexy, headline-grabbing story. A Southern university ordering a God-fearing young student to embrace the ways of Sodom and Gomorrah or face expulsion, now that will have the folks on the Fox News Sunday show couch all excited.

I have a very conservative track record, and I have always defended those who are persecuted unjustly for their legitimate religious beliefs, as long as they are legal. I also have a very well-known distaste for education bureaucracies and the way they tend to steamroll past common sense in the effort to cover their behinds in the midst of a controversy.

I don’t believe we have either scenario playing out here, and in due time that case will be made. The university and its people did nothing wrong, and Keeton’s concern is an overreaction, a misunderstanding based on their instruction to her to change her approach with clients in the workplace, not her personal beliefs.

If ASU or its employees were really as “anti-Christian,” as the ADF attorneys would have you believe, in Augusta, they would have a helluva lot more people fighting them than just Jennifer Keeton. I would be one of them.
Metro Spirit: Austin Rhodes - ASU lawsuit may not have a prayer

I'm confused, if all they did was express their concern, why the diversity training? Is that a lie? If not, then the profs are lying now.

What the professor reportedly did is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

Keeton stated she was unwilling to do so.

 

[Againsheila]

In the suit, Keeton maintains that the instructors ordered her to “change her beliefs” on the topic of homosexuality. Sources at ASU simply claim the women did no such thing.

What they reportedly did do is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

ASU will maintain in their answer to the lawsuit that all Keeton’s instructors did was demonstrate their concern that her Christian views on homosexuality were not germane to the counseling tasks at hand, and that, in fact, offering solutions based on the counselor’s religious beliefs run contrary to the professional code of ethics all graduate students in counseling must embrace in order to receive a diploma. (That is the rule of the American Counseling Association’s Code of Ethics, and it is a constant nationwide.)

The bottom line is that Schenck and Anderson-Wiley refute Keeton’s version of events. ASU has never taken a stand where they urge any student to “change their beliefs” nor would they.

Of course, a disagreement between a student and teachers over what was said in class or in a meeting does not make a sexy, headline-grabbing story. A Southern university ordering a God-fearing young student to embrace the ways of Sodom and Gomorrah or face expulsion, now that will have the folks on the Fox News Sunday show couch all excited.

I have a very conservative track record, and I have always defended those who are persecuted unjustly for their legitimate religious beliefs, as long as they are legal. I also have a very well-known distaste for education bureaucracies and the way they tend to steamroll past common sense in the effort to cover their behinds in the midst of a controversy.

I don’t believe we have either scenario playing out here, and in due time that case will be made. The university and its people did nothing wrong, and Keeton’s concern is an overreaction, a misunderstanding based on their instruction to her to change her approach with clients in the workplace, not her personal beliefs.

If ASU or its employees were really as “anti-Christian,” as the ADF attorneys would have you believe, in Augusta, they would have a helluva lot more people fighting them than just Jennifer Keeton. I would be one of them.
Metro Spirit: Austin Rhodes - ASU lawsuit may not have a prayer

I'm confused, if all they did was express their concern, why the diversity training? Is that a lie? If not, then the profs are lying now.

What the professor reportedly did is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

Keeton stated she was unwilling to do so.

Where does it say that?

I'm thinking the profs are lying now to cover their asses.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I'm confused, if all they did was express their concern, why the diversity training? Is that a lie? If not, then the profs are lying now.

What the professor reportedly did is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

Keeton stated she was unwilling to do so.

Where does it say that?

I'm thinking the profs are lying now to cover their asses.

Scroll back. It's a new story. I'm not surprised you think that way. I disagree.

 

[AllieBaba]

In the suit, Keeton maintains that the instructors ordered her to “change her beliefs” on the topic of homosexuality. Sources at ASU simply claim the women did no such thing.

What they reportedly did do is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

ASU will maintain in their answer to the lawsuit that all Keeton’s instructors did was demonstrate their concern that her Christian views on homosexuality were not germane to the counseling tasks at hand, and that, in fact, offering solutions based on the counselor’s religious beliefs run contrary to the professional code of ethics all graduate students in counseling must embrace in order to receive a diploma. (That is the rule of the American Counseling Association’s Code of Ethics, and it is a constant nationwide.)

The bottom line is that Schenck and Anderson-Wiley refute Keeton’s version of events. ASU has never taken a stand where they urge any student to “change their beliefs” nor would they.

Of course, a disagreement between a student and teachers over what was said in class or in a meeting does not make a sexy, headline-grabbing story. A Southern university ordering a God-fearing young student to embrace the ways of Sodom and Gomorrah or face expulsion, now that will have the folks on the Fox News Sunday show couch all excited.

I have a very conservative track record, and I have always defended those who are persecuted unjustly for their legitimate religious beliefs, as long as they are legal. I also have a very well-known distaste for education bureaucracies and the way they tend to steamroll past common sense in the effort to cover their behinds in the midst of a controversy.

I don’t believe we have either scenario playing out here, and in due time that case will be made. The university and its people did nothing wrong, and Keeton’s concern is an overreaction, a misunderstanding based on their instruction to her to change her approach with clients in the workplace, not her personal beliefs.

If ASU or its employees were really as “anti-Christian,” as the ADF attorneys would have you believe, in Augusta, they would have a helluva lot more people fighting them than just Jennifer Keeton. I would be one of them.
Metro Spirit: Austin Rhodes - ASU lawsuit may not have a prayer

I'm confused, if all they did was express their concern, why the diversity training? Is that a lie? If not, then the profs are lying now.

What the professor reportedly did is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

Keeton stated she was unwilling to do so.

Lol..yeah, right.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I'm confused, if all they did was express their concern, why the diversity training? Is that a lie? If not, then the profs are lying now.

What the professor reportedly did is tell Keeton that her admitted solution to dealing with a (hypothetical) troubled client expressing homosexual thoughts or behaviors, which was based on the Biblical concept that such actions are a sin and should be rejected, is to withhold her religious opinions in the course of such a case.

Keeton stated she was unwilling to do so.

Lol..yeah, right.

We'll see what comes out in the court case. If I'm wrong, I'll eat crow. If I'm right, you will.