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

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. But why this:

Re-Educating Away the Christian Faith

The plan mandated for Keeton requires her to take steps to change her beliefs through additional assignments and additional “diversity sensitivity training."


I never thought the day would come in this country where Christians were forced to go to places to "change their beliefs". We are now becoming no better than Nazi Germany or Stalin Russia.

Wow. 100% religious intolerance to the point of forcing people to change their faith. Never, never, never thought we'd see this.

So you and ABM would be doing this faux outrage if this was about a Muslim man who was asked to change his beliefs about, say...womens roles in their culture?

Are they telling her not to be a christian? Nope. Have they excluded people who are christian? Nope.

Are they asking her to not be a bigot? Yep.

As I said earlier, I guess you and ABM are by default admitting that christian beliefs are bigoted. Bravo. You're (blindly) defending a bigot because they just happen to claim it was because of her religion (which is just masking her bigotry).
 
If christians truly believe that homosexuality is merely a lifestyle choice borne from sexual confusion then I'm afraid I have to disagree with them. I admit that I used to have a similar viewpoint, but over time my perception has changed.
 
You do realize you're just proving tlong's point here, right? That's a conservative christian group. Yeah, they wouldn't be playing up the victim card, nope.

It appears that the distinct point of their disagreements is, the school contends that GLBT is a state of being, as opposed to Keeton's views that it's a state of choice.

Interesting.

Well, that argument will never be settled here. :)
 
If christians truly believe that homosexuality is merely a lifestyle choice borne from sexual confusion then I'm afraid I have to disagree with them. I admit that I used to have a similar viewpoint, but over time my perception has changed.

I believe in God and I don't think that God "created" homosexuals. That would be a cruel form of favoritism to me. Meaning, why would He create some for pro-creation, and others not?
 
It appears that the distinct point of their disagreements is, the school contends that GLBT is a state of being, as opposed to Keeton's views that it's a state of choice.

Interesting.

Well, that argument will never be settled here. :)

So asking her to take classes to expose herself to more information is a bad thing? Um...that's what going to college does? It opens people who might base a lot (too much, imho) of their beliefs in religion, to something that actually can be tested and be seen having evidence of being true.
 
If christians truly believe that homosexuality is merely a lifestyle choice borne from sexual confusion then I'm afraid I have to disagree with them. I admit that I used to have a similar viewpoint, but over time my perception has changed.

But what about the opposite? What about a person in that program that feels that people are born to be queer? And that they see it as a duty to tell children (like the mayor of Portland- OK, OK, just had to) they counsel to become gay? Are they to undergo treatment to change their beliefs? Why is it we have it one way and not the other? That, to me, is the very essence of bigotry.
 
I believe in God and I don't think that God "created" homosexuals. That would be a cruel form of favoritism to me. Meaning, why would He create some for pro-creation, and others not?

1. Gays can pro-create you know.
2. If you say that they can't procreate due to their sexual preference, I guess that means you've never had a blow job, or known any woman or man who has had it up the pooper.
3. You want to talk about a form of cruel "favortism"? Take a look at some severely physical or mental handicapped people. You're telling me that's "God's" plan? why would "he" create someone with no physical limitations, and then out of the same family gene pool, create someone who was born with MD or MS?

Why is "he" playing favorites there? that must've been a choice those people made.
 
So asking her to take classes to expose herself to more information is a bad thing? Um...that's what going to college does? It opens people who might base a lot (too much, imho) of their beliefs in religion, to something that actually can be tested and be seen having evidence of being true.

Yeah, and I also saw Donald Sutherland work his magic in Animal House, as well. ;)
 
1. Gays can pro-create you know..

Really? Hmmm...news to me. I've never read about any of their babies being born. I mean, that's the definition of pro-creation, isn't it?
 
One thing that id irrefutable- she's being singled out for her religious beliefs and all other views are not. That's disturbing.
 
But what about the opposite? What about a person in that program that feels that people are born to be queer? And that they see it as a duty to tell children (like the mayor of Portland- OK, OK, just had to) they counsel to become gay? Are they to undergo treatment to change their beliefs? Why is it we have it one way and not the other? That, to me, is the very essence of bigotry.

Please show us ONE case where that actually happened (and isn't actually a case of someone trying to show gay kids that there is a place for them to get help, or that people need to be accepting of gays)?
 
But what about the opposite? What about a person in that program that feels that people are born to be queer? And that they see it as a duty to tell children (like the mayor of Portland- OK, OK, just had to) they counsel to become gay? Are they to undergo treatment to change their beliefs? Why is it we have it one way and not the other? That, to me, is the very essence of bigotry.

I'm not aware of any people or groups that recommend people become gay. I believe they may tell people it's okay to be gay and I don't have a problem with that. For the most part I don't think people have any choice in whether they're gay or not. I'm glad I'm not gay, but I don't hold any ill-will towards gay people. At least I hope I don't.
 
I believe in God and I don't think that God "created" homosexuals. That would be a cruel form of favoritism to me. Meaning, why would He create some for pro-creation, and others not?

I'm afraid I don't share your beliefs.
 
I'm not aware of any people or groups that recommend people become gay. I believe they may tell people it's okay to be gay and I don't have a problem with that. For the most part I don't think people have any choice in whether they're gay or not. I'm glad I'm not gay, but I don't hold any ill-will towards gay people. At least I hope I don't.

I think me and you hold the same opinion on this topic.
 
...she looks like a snotty attention craving prissy girl looking to become a "reality star" from this whole ordeal [I would also bet that she has participated in at least one beauty pageant within the last 5 years]! She also seems very sheltered and naive. Sad story.

[video=youtube;VdXrLwkwnpc]


She seems very level headed and very humble. She reminds me of my daughter.
 
Really? Hmmm...news to me. I've never read about any of their babies being born. I mean, that's the definition of pro-creation, isn't it?

The can o worms you're opening here is this. It seems that you're suggesting that only a married couple can have kids then. Or that kids never are conceived outside of the "normal" factors.

Because there are families who are perfectly normal that aren't married, and there are couples who are married who can't have kids. Or what about the married couples who don't want to have kids, or don't have sexual relations often?

Is it all based on the idea that their form of sexual relations can't create a child?

Why the hell do you care if two guys do it? or two women? Don't you have better things to worry about, and don't you think god should have better things to worry about too?
 
I'm afraid I don't share your beliefs.

And that's perfectly OK with me....so long as it doesn't preclude me from watching a Blazer game with you in the Nike suite ever again. :)
 
One thing that id irrefutable- she's being singled out for her bigoted beliefs and all other views are not. That's disturbing.

Her religion isn't the cause. her bigotry is.
 
I'm not aware of any people or groups that recommend people become gay. I believe they may tell people it's okay to be gay and I don't have a problem with that. For the most part I don't think people have any choice in whether they're gay or not. I'm glad I'm not gay, but I don't hold any ill-will towards gay people. At least I hope I don't.

Uh, if you may recall, in Oregon recently children in grade schools had to read gay pride material and some had to undergo special counseling by gays in closed rooms without their parents being informed. In Washington my wife (when she taught 3ed grade) was given state mandated books teaching that loggers were "evil" and stuff like that.
 
Really? Hmmm...news to me. I've never read about any of their babies being born. I mean, that's the definition of pro-creation, isn't it?

How come you didn't address the 3rd thing I said?
 
The can o worms you're opening here is this. It seems that you're suggesting that only a married couple can have kids then. Or that kids never are conceived outside of the "normal" factors.

Because there are families who are perfectly normal that aren't married, and there are couples who are married who can't have kids. Or what about the married couples who don't want to have kids, or don't have sexual relations often?

Is it all based on the idea that their form of sexual relations can't create a child?

Why the hell do you care if two guys do it? or two women? Don't you have better things to worry about, and don't you think god should have better things to worry about too?

Dude, relax. I'm talking from the purist sense of the word here. I believe God created husbands and wives to be married their entire lives and have kids and live in Mayberry and ......................
 
And that's perfectly OK with me....so long as it doesn't preclude me from watching a Blazer game with you in the Nike suite ever again. :)

Of course not.
 
Uh, if you may recall, in Oregon recently children in grade schools had to read gay pride material and some had to undergo special counseling by gays in closed rooms without their parents being informed. In Washington my wife (when she taught 3ed grade) was given state mandated books teaching that loggers were "evil" and stuff like that.

How does that address what tlong said?
 
Uh, if you may recall, in Oregon recently children in grade schools had to read gay pride material and some had to undergo special counseling by gays in closed rooms without their parents being informed. In Washington my wife (when she taught 3ed grade) was given state mandated books teaching that loggers were "evil" and stuff like that.

It's a bit of a leap to say that means they were trying to persuade kids to become gay if you ask me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top