So, If You're A Christian, You're Then Unfit To Become A Professional Counselor?

[barfo]

Hey, we ALL have things we're opposed to. That certainly doesn't mean we have to push our own beliefs onto others. That's an entirely different discussion.

It's not a different discussion at all. It's the topic of this thread. Pushing beliefs onto others is exactly why Keeton is getting bounced from school.

barfo

 

[tlongII]

Hey, we ALL have things we're opposed to. That certainly doesn't mean we have to push our own beliefs onto others. That's an entirely different discussion.

So how would you vote on a proposal to ban gay marriage?

 

[ABM]

I don't get this whole "being" or "choice" argument. So what if it's choice?! Wtf are you or anyone else to pass judgment?

Well, it appears as if it's one of the tenants Ms. Keeton is being challenged on.

 

[julius]

Well, it appears as if it's one of the tenants Ms. Keeton is being challenged on.

Cept that she's passing judgment.

 

[ABM]

So how would you vote on a proposal to ban gay marriage?

Gee, let me get back to you on that one.

 

[ABM]

Cept that she's passing judgment.

No, she's simply stating her beliefs.

That said, I think she'll end up leaving the school and pursuing her educational career elsewhere.

 

[tlongII]

Gee, let me get back to you on that one.

Yep, I wouldn't want to answer that here if I were you either.

 

[MickZagger]

I'd hit it.

Meh.

She looks like she'd be similar to fuckin a bucket of sand.

 

[julius]

No, she's simply stating her beliefs.

Did you even read any of the articles you linked?? She's passing judgments on gays, lesbians and TG's.

 

[ABM]

Did you even read any of the articles you linked?? She's passing judgments on gays, lesbians and TG's.

No, she's in school whereas she's been given questions that she is graded on. Whatever she said outside of school is a bit nebulous to me. Is she passing judgement there, or simply telling others what she's been asked in school. Big difference, IMO.

 

[julius]

I'm too tired to continue this...well, it's not so much a debate as much as it is a long winded conversation that's going no where.

I hope you had fun doing it ABM, I enjoyed it. I'd like to say I'm going to turn the other cheek, but I've been sick lately and I'm not sure I should.

 

[barfo]

No, she's in school whereas she's been given questions that she is graded on. Whatever she said outside of school is a bit nebulous to me. Is she passing judgement there, or simply telling others what she's been asked in school. Big difference, IMO.

What she said in or out of school isn't the issue. That's merely how the issue came to the schools attention. The issue is how she's going to counsel students, and she says that she's not willing to accept their sexuality when she disapproves of it. This is all about her pushing her beliefs onto others.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

To my knowledge, she never once said she's intolerant of anything. IMO, If anyone is being intolerant, it's ASU.

Sexual preference, sleeping with aliens, or the like, really have no business even being discussed in our school counseling programs. I mean, do they??

Absolutely, among many other things she is intolerant of.

People don't seek counseling because everything's fine and they fit right in with everyone else.

From the other case linked to this one:

In his 48-page opinion, Judge Steeh said the university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics.

“Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values,” he wrote in a portion of his ruling posted by The Detroit News. “In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.”

 

[MARIS61]

Yes, we all agree that gays are physically capable of having heterosexual sex, just the same as catholic priests. I don't think anyone has ever disputed that.

barfo

I guess I will then.

All evidence indicates priests can only have sex with underage boys.

 

[MARIS61]

No, she's simply stating her beliefs.

That said, I think she'll end up leaving the school and pursuing her educational career elsewhere.

Somewhere where they'll "teach" her what she already knows, rather than actually educating her. It's clear she's not interested in expanding her knowledge, and in fact seems to fear it.

 

[Minstrel]

Yep, and it's their "choice". That's what Keeton has asserted, as well.

You're confusing how Keeton used "choice" and how, say, Julius is.

Julius (and others) are saying that homosexuals can procreate if they choose to simply because it is within the physical realm of possibility. By the same token, you could choose to have sex with a man. It's physically possible.

That is different from sexual preference being a choice. You don't choose to have sex with a man because your sexual preference is heterosexuality (and, presumably, you never chose to be heterosexual, you are innately so). Similarly, homosexuals don't choose to have sex with the opposite sex (and thus procreate) because their unchosen sexuality is for the same sex. They innately have a sexual preference for the same sex, so they don't choose to copulate (that word is not used enough) with the opposite sex.

We make many choices based on the traits we are born with. Sexuality (both heterosexuality and homosexuality) is one of those in-born traits, based on studies of other species of animals and twins studies among humans.

 

[ABM]

We make many choices based on the traits we are born with. Sexuality (both heterosexuality and homosexuality) is one of those in-born traits, based on studies of other species of animals and twins studies among humans.

I had already addressed this in post #37. It's how I personally believe...and am sticking with that.

 

[ABM]

It's not about procreation. Beliefs need no logic or reasoning. You believe you are superior, and don't nobody come at you with logic or reasoning.

I was simply attempting to answer the questions that were directed towards me. In no way was I standing up on some type of bully-pulpit attempting to push my views. Again, simply answering the questions in effort to explain how I think and believe.

That said, in no way do I consider my self as being superior to anyone. It boils down to what I believe the Bible to say. On this particular subject, it's rather clear.

Here's a link to a website I had shared in an earlier post which pretty much captures where I'm at with the homosexuality issue as a whole:

http://carm.org/homosexuality

 

[MARIS61]

I was simply attempting to answer the questions that were directed towards me. In no way was I standing up on some type of bully-pulpit attempting to push my views. Again, simply answering the questions in effort to explain how I think and believe.

That said, in no way do I consider my self as being superior to anyone. It boils down to what I believe the Bible to say. On this particular subject, it's rather clear.

Here's a link to a website I had shared in an earlier post which pretty much captures where I'm at with the homosexuality issue as a whole:

http://carm.org/homosexuality

All but one of those quotes is from the book of Leviticus which is only in the Hebrew bible.

Are you Jewish? Do you follow all the many other ridiculous "laws" enumerated in that book? Do you eat pork? Do you drink alcohol? Do you sacrifice animals on the altar?

Or do you just get queasy thinking about gays?

This supports the post claiming you are a "buffet bible quoter". Not that there is any other kind.

The bible(s) is a book of convenience. It can be used to support any arguement and it can be used to defeat any arguement.

The only certainty about it is that it was written entirely by mortal men and reflects their flaws, shortcomings, and prejudices.

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

Took six pages, but there are finally some comparisons that I think are similiar. I will add another.

What if someone is a faith healer and wants to graduate medical school?

I know when seeing a degree in my doctor's office or accredation from the AMA that they adhere to the beliefs of that school/association.

My advice would be for her to enroll in a program that matchs her beliefs.

 

[ABM]

All but one of those quotes is from the book of Leviticus which is only in the Hebrew bible.

Are you Jewish? Do you follow all the many other ridiculous "laws" enumerated in that book? Do you eat pork? Do you drink alcohol? Do you sacrifice animals on the altar?

Or do you just get queasy thinking about gays?

This supports the post claiming you are a "buffet bible quoter". Not that there is any other kind.

The bible(s) is a book of convenience. It can be used to support any arguement and it can be used to defeat any arguement.

The only certainty about it is that it was written entirely by mortal men and reflects their flaws, shortcomings, and prejudices.

As for my personal beliefs, I am certainly entitled to them. As for the thread topic, I believe Ms. Keeton should be allowed her personal beliefs, as well. As for what the result there will be, I believe, unfortunately, she'll be relegated towards finding another educational institution which more closely aligns to her belief system (although, the reason she claims she registered @ ASU was due to academic/financial reason.)

We shall see.

 

[ABM]

I agree. You, Ms. Keeton, and anyone else are entitled to whatever personal beliefs. People and institutions are also entitled to reject those beliefs. What's the problem here?

OK, well, this is what I related in my very first post:

That said, why should Ms. Keeton have to "automatically" fit within those (GLBTQ) guidelines in order to receive her counseling degree? I mean, if she just wanted to focus on traditional marriages, etc. as her area of expertise, then so be it. Right?

Obviously, I don't get it.

Now, when I posted that, I wasn't aware that she wants to become a school (as opposed to marriage) counselor. Not sure if that really matters, though.

Let's say she somehow receives her counseling degree. If she applied for a counseling position at (fill in the blank here) school, I wonder if they'd have the right to not hire (let alone, ask) her based upon her beliefs regarding homosexuality (which, to me, is a very personal matter)? I mean, wouldn't that essentially be discrimination?

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

Let's say she somehow receives her counseling degree. If she applied for a counseling position at (fill in the blank here) school, I wonder if they'd have the right to not hire (let alone, ask) her based upon her beliefs regarding homosexuality (which, to me, is a very personal matter)? I mean, wouldn't that essentially be discrimination?

It would be discrimination if they asked directly since one could "not practice what they preach". What the interviewer would ask would be a case scenario involving a homosexual couple. If the answer was "Homosexuality is a sin and this couple would be doomed", the employer would be justified in not giving her a job.

 

[ABM]

If she espouses her beliefs in her counseling, she should be fired.

Of course.

Why would that be discrimination?

I was referring to this happening during the hiring process. Naturally, she'd have to abide by the school policies once she was hired. Perhaps, I'm ignorant. Do school counselors even have the right to "counsel" in personal sexual matters? I would think not.

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

I would also have a problem if the degree had nothing to do with christianity and the person was failed because of it.

Also, should Christian institutions give degrees for preaching if the student is a satanist?

 

[ABM]

It would be discrimination if they asked directly since one could "not practice what they preach". What the interviewer would ask would be a case scenario involving a homosexual couple. If the answer was "Homosexuality is a sin and this couple would be doomed", the employer would be justified in not giving her a job.

Read my OP. I related a link in that counselors/therapists indicate whether they have expertise in gay/lesbian issues, or not. I would think she wouldn't.

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

Read my OP. I related a link in that counselors/therapists indicate whether they have expertise in gay/lesbian issues, or not. I would think she wouldn't.

As a doctor, could I only specialize in hot blondes?

 

[ABM]

As a doctor, could I only specialize in hot blondes?

Perhaps.

I'll introduce you to Jill Savage if you're able to go to the M&G tomorrow night. You could start there.

 

[ABM]

Personally, I'm not fond of the idea of school teachers and counselors "counseling" my kids. How they behave as people will be my responsibility, not some ........adults that I hardly know. Teach them math, science, history, and whatever else, but leave the ethical and moral teachings to the parents.

Exactly.

So, then, should Ms. Keeton be expelled from ASU, or not? Effectively, that's the crux of this thread.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I don't get your question. She wants to be a counselor, and in that role she'll give inputs and suggestions. Right? As a counselor, she'll be able to give her personal inputs more than most people would be able to in their jobs. But she still has to follow guidelines. If the guidelines says, "you can't tell them to go fuck themselves or they should kill themselves because they're doomed anyway", then she'll have to abide by that.

She apparently didn't want to abide by that guidelines, so they should say adios to her.

I think the main issue is whether or not a university or a professional association should be able to discriminate against a protected class via said guidelines.

If the belief over which she is potentially being expelled is directly derived from her religion, then that's exactly what's happening.

And before it's asked--no, "religious" beliefs espousing racism or misogyny are not equal to this, because they themselves are also discriminatory of a protected class, and are therefore not legally considerable in terms or religious protection. As of now, sexual orientation is not considered a legally protected class, so legally, religious considerations should take precedence.

All that said, until there is some indication from ASU as to what beliefs/behavior led to the "re-education" requirements, all this speculation is incredibly premature. We have only her side of the story and external commentary, so we really can't proffer an educated opinion on the validity of her claims at this point.