MISLEADING TITLE?
In reading the title of this “news” again, I think it’s misleading and should be corrected. Arauz was not dismissed because he “is gay.” I haven’t seen any person losing their jobs for “being gay”( though there may be some, and it is wrong). He was in a homosexual relationship; this is different from “being gay.”
I am not judging anybody, I am stating the fact as I see them. The title of this news is “fake” and needs to be corrected.
Really proud of the Florida Conference and this Forest Lake SDA school for standing firm against this teacher’s attempt to bring attention to himself and to a cause that is not congruent with the SDA church and the Christian faith.
He should have never taken the position…
Who cares if it is? “Our Church” is not the only life option available to people. Let the closed minded be closed minded. “Let the dead bury their dead.”
Would you equally support employers firing people for refusing to work on Sabbath, or holding certain religious views they don’t support?
So, you would be ok, for example, with homosexual boss to fire an Adventist employee because their views on homosexuality are in conflict?
That is a great question.
But is the problem that simple?
Before 2015, the clergy did not generally marry men to men.
With the 2015 SCOTUS decision it became more common.
Will it soon be before it becomes mandatory?
Two polar opposite positions vying for equality.
Can these opposing views coexist harmoniously?
Or will they fight to the death (of one or the other)?
Managing preferences in a diverse country is always complex. But I don’t think we can avoid this question by offering a slippery slope position.
Couldn’t a homosexual also ask… how long before everyone in the country is allowed to fire me because of my sexual identity?
The issue here is about identity. If Adventists can fire homosexuals, can homosexuals fire Adventists? I’m not sure why the issue isn’t clear here.
OK, this makes a noticeable difference ! Yet the very case asks for further earnest considerations -as long as “we” hold it as number 29 = 3 (a) of our basic bicbelieves that homosexual orientation is a choice and , promote the “Outcoming Ministries” - as here in Austria . - we cannot fairly discuss suggestions as a pastoral help for a lifestyle we could accept as “SDA” besides our own individual heterosexual “Uncle Arthurs Bedtime Stories” subcultures style…
I never weigh in on this issue. Not sure I have the wisdom, although I am firmly convinced gay people are born, not made. But, I don’t understand why Christians like to focus on this issue, almost to the exclusion of others. In the eyes of the sex police, is being homosexual worse than lying, hatred, gossip, dishonesty, etc? Why aren’t the sex police as proactive on those matters as they are on homosexuality? Why aren’t they as curious to root things out? This dynamic seems weird to me. Warped, even.
Here is something to consider.
The dynamics behind this “weird” behavior is the same dynamics as when people destroy property that others have but they cannot have. We see this among children who envies a toy his friend has but cannot have so might as well destroy the toy so no one can enjoy the toy. It is the same dynamics that compelled Cain to kill Abel. If Cain cannot have the love of God, then Abel should not have it as well. The irony in this case is the fact that those individuals involved with this”weird” behaviors are betraying unconsciously what they profess to believe as Christians.
It does not make sense to me either.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.