| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/24/2011 02:27:58 PM · #5551 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
... and exactly what is your point  Nullix ? Surely you must recognize the fact that they did in fact discriminate against a couple based solely on the fact that they are gay.
Ray |
I think his point was that maybe 1000 posts ago the tone of this conversation was saying the religious people could have their view and nobody was forcing them to do anything but they should in turn allow others to do what they want. He's pointing out that as things progress this quickly does not appear to be the case and that there is a push-and-pull. It's always been argued that allowing religious freedom to inform social issues stifles expressions like gay marriage, but it appears to be as likely that allowing freedoms such as gay marriage stifles religious freedom.
The trick is going to be finding the balance. It would have been easier if one way allowed for the existence of both, but it doesn't seem to be that easy. |
Major blow dealt to Catholic Charities in Illinois over homosexual adoption
Originally posted by From Article:
An Illinois judge has ruled that the state of Illinois may legally refuse to renew its foster care and adoption contacts with Catholic Charities adoption agency over the agency̢۪s refusal to place children with homosexual couples. |
Another religions freedom going...going...gone. |
|
|
|
08/24/2011 02:32:19 PM · #5552 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Major blow dealt to Catholic Charities in Illinois over homosexual adoption
Originally posted by From Article:
An Illinois judge has ruled that the state of Illinois may legally refuse to renew its foster care and adoption contacts with Catholic Charities adoption agency over the agency̢۪s refusal to place children with homosexual couples. |
Another religions freedom going...going...gone. |
No, they have all the freedon to discriminate they want, just not using taxpayer dollars to fund their program. |
|
|
|
08/24/2011 07:56:00 PM · #5553 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by From Article:
An Illinois judge has ruled that the state of Illinois may legally refuse to renew its foster care and adoption contacts with Catholic Charities adoption agency over the agency̢۪s refusal to place children with homosexual couples. |
Another religions freedom going...going...gone. |
I will work on the premise that you know "Jack Shit" about legal issues and let you peruse the contents of the decision you refer to and tell me exactly how they are losing anyting.
Please do explain how it is that they are being dealt a major blow. The rules of law are for all to adhere to and any and all forms of discrimination need to be dealt with... and they are being addressed in this instance.
Ray |
|
|
|
08/24/2011 10:28:40 PM · #5554 |
Are you stealing the rainbow too? |
|
|
|
08/25/2011 05:51:50 PM · #5555 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Are you stealing the rainbow too? |
David, dear, I guess I'd better bring you up to date on the rainbow colors. You see they have been a symbol of Gay Pride for many years now. Here's an example I put in a challenge some time back: 
So, you see, when New York State made it possible for gay people to be married in their state, it was a nice, pleasant celebratory thing to do to light Niagara Falls in the rainbow lights. This is because Niagara Falls is sometimes known as a Honeymoon mecca.
I hope this helps you understand the symbolism of the lighting of Niagara Falls.
:)
|
|
|
|
08/25/2011 08:47:32 PM · #5556 |
The freedom to take government money and use it to facilitate adoptions, but not to gay people.
Damn, I use that one myself ALL THE TIME.
I bet they're coming for me next! I better look out! |
|
|
|
12/06/2011 07:00:22 PM · #5557 |
|
|
|
12/06/2011 07:36:37 PM · #5558 |
It's not a case of religious freedoms being taken away. It's being commanded to set aside her religious beliefs in order to do her job *properly* as a professional counselor. By her stating that her beliefs will affect how she views patients without regard for their situation, she is basically being discriminatory. She must do so, or recuse herself from counseling homosexual clients/patients. This will also create problems for her with the laws of the state and equitable distribution of insurance benefits.
Again, this is one of those ludicrous situations where someone is claiming that sexual orientation is a choice.....we've been down this road before, haven't we, Tom?
Not to mention that the core principles and the code of ethics of the program are clearly stated. She knew better.....
Message edited by author 2011-12-06 19:48:39.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2011 09:56:20 PM · #5559 |
| So why is that we continue to care how others live their lives? |
|
|
|
12/07/2011 02:37:47 PM · #5560 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Not to mention that the core principles and the code of ethics of the program are clearly stated. She knew better..... |
I'm guessing the Code of Ethics was more concerned with someone saying, "I will not see you because you are gay, black, a woman, etc." rather than saying "I'll see you, but I will tell you your activity is wrong." I'm sure she will not wind up with many gay clients and market forces will work it all out.
Flipping it on its head, I don't think many people would say it is within the rights of a conservative college to prepare to dismiss someone from the program because they felt that homosexuality was not a choice, etc. and were prepared to counsel people in such a manner. The principle remains the same though we agree with one position and not the other. |
|
|
|
12/07/2011 04:06:28 PM · #5561 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Not to mention that the core principles and the code of ethics of the program are clearly stated. She knew better..... |
I'm guessing the Code of Ethics was more concerned with someone saying, "I will not see you because you are gay, black, a woman, etc." rather than saying "I'll see you, but I will tell you your activity is wrong." I'm sure she will not wind up with many gay clients and market forces will work it all out. |
She might have no knowledge of her clients sexuality until it came up in a session, by which time it could be very damaging to them for her to be judgemental about it.
Message edited by author 2011-12-07 16:07:31.
|
|
|
|
12/07/2011 04:49:34 PM · #5562 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Not to mention that the core principles and the code of ethics of the program are clearly stated. She knew better..... |
I'm guessing the Code of Ethics was more concerned with someone saying, "I will not see you because you are gay, black, a woman, etc." rather than saying "I'll see you, but I will tell you your activity is wrong." I'm sure she will not wind up with many gay clients and market forces will work it all out. |
...and do you think that someone studying theology could freely express views than ran counter to the accepted norm and still be welcomed within that institution.
I seem to recall that they frowned on that type of behaviour when I attended a Jesuit college many years ago... maybe things have changed.
Ray |
|
|
|
12/07/2011 05:36:12 PM · #5563 |
People are entitled to their opinions, but educational institutions are supposed to lift the veil of ignorance. This student was not kicked out of school for her views, she was asked to study certain things and she agreed to do so. Then she decided not to. Then she quit the school. Then she sued the school.
The school has no right to tell her what to think, but they do have the obligation to expose their students to the truth. The school demanded that this student
Attend three workshops on "improving cross-cultural" communication, with the idea of learning to work effectively with gay populations.
Read at least 10 articles in peer-reviewed counseling or psychology journals on counseling gay populations.
"Increase exposure to and interaction with gay populations" through activities such as attending the local gay pride parade, and report on those activities.
Study the Association for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues in Counseling's Competencies for Counseling with Transgender Clients. from here
Granted they seem to have singled her out for extra study because of her beliefs , but had she done the extra assigned work, and still held her views, she would have had a legal leg to stand on; but she felt the school did not have the right to make her learn what she wasn't interested in learning about, and that is pretty much their job, to educate students. If they don't like it, they can go be ignorant elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
12/07/2011 06:00:39 PM · #5564 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Not to mention that the core principles and the code of ethics of the program are clearly stated. She knew better..... |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'm guessing the Code of Ethics was more concerned with someone saying, "I will not see you because you are gay, black, a woman, etc." rather than saying "I'll see you, but I will tell you your activity is wrong." I'm sure she will not wind up with many gay clients and market forces will work it all out. |
That, like you said, is your guess. I think that they're more concerned with assuring their clients that professional standards are upheld and that counseling will be offered in a propfessional manner rather than imposing the personal, religious beliefs of the counselor, especially to be told they're wrong without professional basis.
Market forces will work it all out? What.....so we lose a few gays because of our resident zealot, no big deal! Nice!
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Flipping it on its head, I don't think many people would say it is within the rights of a conservative college to prepare to dismiss someone from the program because they felt that homosexuality was not a choice, etc. and were prepared to counsel people in such a manner. The principle remains the same though we agree with one position and not the other. |
Personal beliefs and feelings are not part of a professional counseling regimen, especially when you're telling someone who sought help that they're wrong. The subject is very controversial, and to take a side because of beliefs as a counselor, especially if it directly contradicts the policies of the organization where the counselor is practicing, leaves no alternative BUT to remove that person.
Message edited by author 2011-12-07 18:03:03.
|
|
|
|
12/07/2011 06:03:30 PM · #5565 |
I'm 99% sure the article doesn't tell the whole story so really it's crazy to weigh in on it at all. But the principles are interesting. Most people here, I would think, would qualify as "freethinkers". They don't like to be told what to think and want to make up their own minds about something. It seems like the subject matter is so charged that it sways people from taking a position they might normally take. Most of the usual people in these discussions, I would think, would treat the idea of being told what to think or do as anathema.
I remember in medical school seeing a video for part of a class on a man who was burned on over 90% of his body. The rehabilition for such a thing is very grueling and very painful. In this video the hospital essentially forced him to do this therapy even though he begged to die. We were asked to write an essay on whether this was right or wrong. I remember being struck by one line in the video where the patient said after the fact, "now that I'm through, I'm happy they made me do it". I used that to write an essay that perhaps there are times where patients are not capable of making good decisions and someone needs to step in for them. (I was young and I think my position may have since shifted to something more complex, but it's still an interesting dilemma). I got a response on the paper from the proctor that I needed to reassess my reasons for becoming a doctor and that my position was incorrect. I wrote him a note back saying I thought it was his job to present the problems and make us think about our positions but it was inappropriate for him to tell me what to think.
To me, this may be a bit like that (with the giant caveat again that we are unlikely to have anything like an accurate portrayal of the story). |
|
|
|
12/07/2011 06:28:46 PM · #5566 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I remember in medical school seeing a video for part of a class on a man who was burned on over 90% of his body. The rehabilition for such a thing is very grueling and very painful. In this video the hospital essentially forced him to do this therapy even though he begged to die. We were asked to write an essay on whether this was right or wrong. I remember being struck by one line in the video where the patient said after the fact, "now that I'm through, I'm happy they made me do it". I used that to write an essay that perhaps there are times where patients are not capable of making good decisions and someone needs to step in for them. |
And that someone must be someone independent -- a family member, judge, etc. -- outside of the patient's treatment team, who can make the evaluation as to whether or not the patient is competent to make such decisions. The hospital/medical staff have biases and conflicts of interest which should disqualify them from making the decision. |
|
|
|
12/07/2011 06:42:15 PM · #5567 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I remember in medical school seeing a video for part of a class on a man who was burned on over 90% of his body. The rehabilition for such a thing is very grueling and very painful. In this video the hospital essentially forced him to do this therapy even though he begged to die. We were asked to write an essay on whether this was right or wrong. I remember being struck by one line in the video where the patient said after the fact, "now that I'm through, I'm happy they made me do it". I used that to write an essay that perhaps there are times where patients are not capable of making good decisions and someone needs to step in for them. |
And that someone must be someone independent -- a family member, judge, etc. -- outside of the patient's treatment team, who can make the evaluation as to whether or not the patient is competent to make such decisions. The hospital/medical staff have biases and conflicts of interest which should disqualify them from making the decision. |
Who would decide this is, of course, a very difficult question. It's not important for the issue at hand.
I pondered a little and thought of another analogy that might explain some of the controversy. Some people think of the issue of homosexuality as akin to whether the earth is flat or round. The facts are in and anybody with any education on the matter would only hold one opinion. Others think the issue is more akin to economic theory, let's say whether or not Keynesian economics is valid. The facts are squishy and smart people are all over the board on it. Only a fool would think one position is unarguably superior to all others.
If you think the issue presented is closer to the flat earth analogy it's clear that "correcting" this young gal's thinking is only reasonable. If you think the issue is closer to economic theories then "correcting" may be overstepping.
Really, if the things she was required to do were listed by Brennan I don't have a problem with some of them. You can do your best to expose your students to issues, but if she had to sign something at the end saying, "I believe..." (which nobody said she did) then I think that's too much. Frankly, just the fact there is a lawsuit about this raises red flags. People willing to sue for such things probably tend to fall within a certain subset of people. I dunno. That's a gut reaction.
Message edited by author 2011-12-07 18:43:17. |
|
|
|
12/07/2011 08:26:07 PM · #5568 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
(with the giant caveat again that we are unlikely to have anything like an accurate portrayal of the story). |
It is always interesting reading about a single situation from several viewpoints.
So we had the Fox story of faith under attack.
We have a piece from the viewpoint of educators trying to react to a student with a strong minority opinion.
And a local paper explaining why the suit was thrown out with my favorite line to sum the whole thing up. (PS Hall is the judge in the case)
"In an Aug. 11 hearing, ASU professors testified that the plan was not a punishment for voicing her beliefs, but a tool to teach Keeton how to counsel clients while not imposing her views.
All three professors testified that they never told (Keeton) that she was required to change her religious beliefs in order to stay in the counseling program," Hall wrote.
He noted that Keeton did not testify at the hearing nor present any witnesses in support of her motion.
Hall said Keeton's unwillingness to adhere to the school's viewpoint-neutral code of ethics set by the American Counseling Association constitutes a refusal to complete the curriculum."
Like the three blind men and the elephant, it takes a few view points to try to get a balanced view of any news story. If a story is shocking it is probably misleading. |
|
|
|
12/07/2011 09:54:27 PM · #5569 |
This quote says it all, IMNSHO.
"It was not (Keeton's) personal beliefs that were their concern, but rather only her inability to separate her personal beliefs in the judgment-free zone of a professional counseling situation," Hall said.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2011 11:51:32 AM · #5570 |
And yet here we are whinging about religious freedoms being taken away.
Always playing the victim.
At the risk of comparing gays to dogs like Santorum loves to do... this is like a US Muslim veterinarian refusing to treat dogs. Get another job.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2011 09:16:56 PM · #5571 |
Gay rights groups apologizes for same sex marriage
I know I usually post pro-marriage stuff, but this is a great come back for gay marriage advocates.
|
|
|
|
01/06/2012 01:49:12 PM · #5572 |
An article worth reading in my opinion.
I was most intrigued with the writers question regarding how much time is spent on living the main 2 commandments versus trying to identify the shortcomings of others.
At least this one christian (the article writer) has evolved into a different mindset. |
|
|
|
01/06/2012 02:16:15 PM · #5573 |
Originally posted by Flash:
An article worth reading in my opinion.
I was most intrigued with the writers question regarding how much time is spent on living the main 2 commandments versus trying to identify the shortcomings of others.
At least this one christian (the article writer) has evolved into a different mindset. |
Interesting indeed ... thanks for posting it.
Originally posted by Cited Article:
I am an evangelical Christian who, I am sorry to say, used to be one of the "don̢۪t-confuse-me-with-facts-because-my-mind-is-made-up" type of Christian....
If one can find anything amusing in all this, it is that those who are upset about sex outside of marriage are the same ones who are opposed to marriage equality.
The principles for heterosexual marriage are the same for same-sex marriage—love, commitment, faithfulness, loyalty, honor and respect. How can we deny that to anyone? |
Message edited by author 2012-01-06 14:18:12. |
|
|
|
01/07/2012 12:26:37 AM · #5574 |
Originally posted by Shari Johnson:
I am an evangelical Christian who, I am sorry to say, used to be one of the "don't-confuse-me-with-facts-because-my-mind-is-made-up" type of Christian. |
I try to stay away from those types of people. God is truth, so the facts shouldn't be confusing. Facts should bring us closer to God. |
|
|
|
01/07/2012 09:51:14 AM · #5575 |
Originally posted by Shari Johnson:
I am an evangelical Christian who, I am sorry to say, used to be one of the "don't-confuse-me-with-facts-because-my-mind-is-made-up" type of Christian. |
Originally posted by Nullix:
I try to stay away from those types of people. God is truth, so the facts shouldn't be confusing. Facts should bring us closer to God. |
The problem lies in where some of you decide what the facts are.....especially when you use faith to support your facts....then they're not facts.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/31/2025 04:30:28 PM EDT.
