PERSECUTION in America

[Axxman]

Nearly everytime I go into a restaurant, I see signs posted that they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. In a free country, we shouldn't be required to meet with anyone we don't want to, so if this woman doesn't want to counsel homosexuals, or anyone else, that should be her right. I still side with her over the school. If she wants to have a counseling degree and then use that degree to preach, that should also be her right. If her clients don't like the way she does things, they can go to someone else. If I was a counselor, I wouldn't separate my Christian beliefs from my job. I wouldn't refuse to counsel homosexuals, but that is my decision, but my counsel would be based on their lifestyle being a dissorder, and steering them away from it.

I pretty much agree with you here...

Problem is, she went into an Italian restaurant and is demanding mexican food. She is training to be an Italian chef, and wants to work in an Italian restaurant...and refuses to cook Italian food. She has every right to have her opinions and she can refuse to counsel anybody she wants. Unfortunately, she chose a school that is accredited by the ACA and follows those national standards and she isn't qualified by those standards to receive a degree from that school. It is a free country...but she has no more right to demand the school change their accredation standards than you do of going into a McDonalds and demanding a Whopper...they'll tell you to go where Whoppers are made.

Its pretty interesting really...there are two separate "christian counselor" stories out there right now. One refused to do her job and counsel a homosexual...the other wanted to counsel them and was not allowed. I stand by the young lady who wanted to do her job, wanted to counsel her client. That story is far more compelling to me as a Christian being persecuted, than the story of a woman who refused to even see the client.

[Burning_Ember]

Nearly everytime I go into a restaurant, I see signs posted that they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. In a free country, we shouldn't be required to meet with anyone we don't want to, so if this woman doesn't want to counsel homosexuals, or anyone else, that should be her right. I still side with her over the school. If she wants to have a counseling degree and then use that degree to preach, that should also be her right. If her clients don't like the way she does things, they can go to someone else. If I was a counselor, I wouldn't separate my Christian beliefs from my job. I wouldn't refuse to counsel homosexuals, but that is my decision, but my counsel would be based on their lifestyle being a dissorder, and steering them away from it.

I pretty much agree with you here...

Problem is, she went into an Italian restaurant and is demanding mexican food. She is training to be an Italian chef, and wants to work in an Italian restaurant...and refuses to cook Italian food. She has every right to have her opinions and she can refuse to counsel anybody she wants. Unfortunately, she chose a school that is accredited by the ACA and follows those national standards and she isn't qualified by those standards to receive a degree from that school. It is a free country...but she has no more right to demand the school change their accredation standards than you do of going into a McDonalds and demanding a Whopper...they'll tell you to go where Whoppers are made.

Its pretty interesting really...there are two separate "christian counselor" stories out there right now. One refused to do her job and counsel a homosexual...the other wanted to counsel them and was not allowed. I stand by the young lady who wanted to do her job, wanted to counsel her client. That story is far more compelling to me as a Christian being persecuted, than the story of a woman who refused to even see the client.

This pretty much sums it up.

[Axxman]

She refused only after, (according to her testimony and the testimony of her Lawyer), the ACA demanded she counsel Homsexual Unions in a specific manner that ran afoul of her Inalienable Right to Religious Freedom.

She did not refuse the ACA's demands to counsel Homosexuls.

Okay...you keep repeating this and I think its completely false. I have read the court documents from her lawyers and the judges decision. They are all quite clear...she was reviewing the clients file and discovered that he was homosexual. She then immediately moved to cancel the appointment. The appointment was canceled within 2 hours of the scheduled appointment. She refused to see him. There is absolutely NO evidence that her punishment came because of her Christian beliefs about homosexuals...this also came out in court. She was vocal about her bias in her classwork and yet the allegedly unchristian school was givng her A's anyway.

From the judge's ruling: "Prior to the events instigating this litigation, plaintiff

openly shared her view of homosexuality as being morally wrong during classroom

discussion and in her coursework. For example, plaintiff turned in a paper for a class

involving the potential for religion-based values conflicts with clients for which she

received a perfect score. Specifically, she wrote,

[Shiloh62]

and then one wonders why America is falling

[Matthitjah]

She refused only after, (according to her testimony and the testimony of her Lawyer), the ACA demanded she counsel Homsexual Unions in a specific manner that ran afoul of her Inalienable Right to Religious Freedom.

She did not refuse the ACA's demands to counsel Homosexuls.

Okay...you keep repeating this and I think its completely false. I have read the court documents from her lawyers and the judges decision. They are all quite clear...she was reviewing the clients file and discovered that he was homosexual. She then immediately moved to cancel the appointment. The appointment was canceled within 2 hours of the scheduled appointment. She refused to see him. There is absolutely NO evidence that her punishment came because of her Christian beliefs about homosexuals...this also came out in court. She was vocal about her bias in her classwork and yet the allegedly unchristian school was givng her A's anyway.

From the judge's ruling: "Prior to the events instigating this litigation, plaintiff

openly shared her view of homosexuality as being morally wrong during classroom

discussion and in her coursework. For example, plaintiff turned in a paper for a class

involving the potential for religion-based values conflicts with clients for which she

received a perfect score. Specifically, she wrote, n situations were [sic] the value

differences between a counselor and client are not amenable, standard practice

requires that the counselor refer his/her client to someone capable of meeting their

needs. Although plaintiff claims that her professors disagreeable reactions to her

opinions shut down her point of view, she nonetheless received As in all of her

classes."

Furthermore...the client was coming to her for help with depression. She read in the file that he was homosexual. She was refusing to treat someone who needed help because she disagreed with sin in their life. The client wasn't coming to her to discuss homosexuality...they were depressed.

Axx,

You're missing the point completely.

As a Christian one of us may have complete disdain for the homosexual lifestyle for various reasons. We may even have it in our past that we were abused or have had some other misconception. It doesn't matter why and the Word is quite clear though, that if this behaviour or mindeset is going to trip us up whether it be through anger, or what have you, we are to avoid it. Maybe she's like an alcoholic around homosexuals and can't trust herself. Regardless, in our Faith it's not up to you and I to decide her conscience in this regard and neither can the court force her to abandon her inalienable right to Freedom of Religion.

I might counsel that Homosexual over depression because for me it's not a stumbling stone, she may not, maybe you have an issue of anger over it. All three of us have Freedom of Religion.

She wrote in her school papers, that you quote, that she would refer the person to another counselor. She refused to counsel based on her closely held religious convictions and Faith which the ACA told her were wrong headed, wrong thinking, and demanded that she get "re-programmed" so that she would think right.

She's a student , but in the real world she would simply have told the Homosexual, " I don't treat homosexuals," then the client would have sought treatment elsewhere either through referral or not. She would not have been told in her private practice that she needed re-programming and that she was employing wrong headed thinking because of her Christian convictions.

Why she is not treating Homosexuals is between herself and God and no accreditation agency, no Court, no school, and no Government has a right to intervene. She may not get any clients due to her bias, maybe God will bless her, but her thinking is between herself and her God. Maybe God will conviict her? maybe God's allright with it due to some issue in her past? I don't know but it's not for the ACA to decide what right minded thinking constitutes and the Court is dead wrong on this issue. It goes against the Consitution and her right to Freedom of Religion. What's next? Is the ACA suddenly going to stop accreditating Muslims who refuse to counsel folks who eat pork because it is wrong headed thinking to believe that someone will go to hell for eating pork? Will they "re-program" the Muslim?

Sorry bro you're completely missing the entire issue.

peace,

dave

[nebula]

As a Christian one of us may have complete disdain for the homosexual lifestyle for various reasons.

Or it could be that her convictions would have her treat the homosexuality as a disorder, but being aware that doing so would create conflict and problems, considered it best not to treat the client.

[Shiloh62]

She refused only after, (according to her testimony and the testimony of her Lawyer), the ACA demanded she counsel Homsexual Unions in a specific manner that ran afoul of her Inalienable Right to Religious Freedom.

She did not refuse the ACA's demands to counsel Homosexuls.

Okay...you keep repeating this and I think its completely false. I have read the court documents from her lawyers and the judges decision. They are all quite clear...she was reviewing the clients file and discovered that he was homosexual. She then immediately moved to cancel the appointment. The appointment was canceled within 2 hours of the scheduled appointment. She refused to see him. There is absolutely NO evidence that her punishment came because of her Christian beliefs about homosexuals...this also came out in court. She was vocal about her bias in her classwork and yet the allegedly unchristian school was givng her A's anyway.

From the judge's ruling: "Prior to the events instigating this litigation, plaintiff

openly shared her view of homosexuality as being morally wrong during classroom

discussion and in her coursework. For example, plaintiff turned in a paper for a class

involving the potential for religion-based values conflicts with clients for which she

received a perfect score. Specifically, she wrote, n situations were [sic] the value

differences between a counselor and client are not amenable, standard practice

requires that the counselor refer his/her client to someone capable of meeting their

needs. Although plaintiff claims that her professors disagreeable reactions to her

opinions shut down her point of view, she nonetheless received As in all of her

classes."

Furthermore...the client was coming to her for help with depression. She read in the file that he was homosexual. She was refusing to treat someone who needed help because she disagreed with sin in their life. The client wasn't coming to her to discuss homosexuality...they were depressed.

Axx,

You're missing the point completely.

As a Christian one of us may have complete disdain for the homosexual lifestyle for various reasons. We may even have it in our past that we were abused or have had some other misconception. It doesn't matter why and the Word is quite clear though, that if this behaviour or mindeset is going to trip us up whether it be through anger, or what have you, we are to avoid it. Maybe she's like an alcoholic around homosexuals and can't trust herself. Regardless, in our Faith it's not up to you and I to decide her conscience in this regard and neither can the court force her to abandon her inalienable right to Freedom of Religion.

I might counsel that Homosexual over depression because for me it's not a stumbling stone, she may not, maybe you have an issue of anger over it. All three of us have Freedom of Religion.

She wrote in her school papers, that you quote, that she would refer the person to another counselor. She refused to counsel based on her closely held religious convictions and Faith which the ACA told her were wrong headed, wrong thinking, and demanded that she get "re-programmed" so that she would think right.

She's a student , but in the real world she would simply have told the Homosexual, " I don't treat homosexuals," then the client would have sought treatment elsewhere either through referral or not. She would not have been told in her private practice that she needed re-programming and that she was employing wrong headed thinking because of her Christian convictions.

Why she is not treating Homosexuals is between herself and God and no accreditation agency, no Court, no school, and no Government has a right to intervene. She may not get any clients due to her bias, maybe God will bless her, but her thinking is between herself and her God. Maybe God will conviict her? maybe God's allright with it due to some issue in her past? I don't know but it's not for the ACA to decide what right minded thinking constitutes and the Court is dead wrong on this issue. It goes against the Consitution and her right to Freedom of Religion. What's next? Is the ACA suddenly going to stop accreditating Muslims who refuse to counsel folks who eat pork because it is wrong headed thinking to believe that someone will go to hell for eating pork? Will they "re-program" the Muslim?

Sorry bro you're completely missing the entire issue.

peace,

dave

Well put mattitiah. Sometimes in our life we will have to choose between what our country says is right, and what we know from God is right. God grant us the faith to stand by your word, even if it means we will be persecuted for it. We are living in the last days in which is it is even more important to follow God's word,and His commandments, even if that means opposing the ways of the world.

[Axxman]

You're missing the point completely.

As a Christian one of us may have complete disdain for the homosexual lifestyle for various reasons. We may even have it in our past that we were abused or have had some other misconception. It doesn't matter why and the Word is quite clear though, that if this behaviour or mindeset is going to trip us up whether it be through anger, or what have you, we are to avoid it. Maybe she's like an alcoholic around homosexuals and can't trust herself. Regardless, in our Faith it's not up to you and I to decide her conscience in this regard and neither can the court force her to abandon her inalienable right to Freedom of Religion.

At least I got you to quit claiming that she didn't refuse to see the client. Which WAS my point. In order for this to be religious persecution you would have to prove that others are routinely allowed to refuse clients for personal reasons. There is no evidence that has happened. She was terminated because she allowed her personal bias to get in the way of helping someone. The university is allowed to have standards. If she wanted to get a degree that would allow her to pick and choose what kinds of people she could help...she should have chosen to go to a school with different standards.

Now...onto your religious freedom. I assume then that you are okay with Muslims getting medical degrees even if they refuse to participate in industry standardized pre-op wash-up techniques. Female muslim students refused to wash their arms and hands past their wrists before surgical proceedures, and then refused to wear gloves past their wrists. They were removed from their classes...but according to you they have the religious freedom to refuse proper surgical cleaning routines and it is NOT up to you , or I, or the University to decide their conscience in this regard...and they cannot be forced by the court to abandon their inalienable right to Freedom of religion. I think thats ludicrous.

This woman may believe whatever she wants. You could be a Zen Buddist who believes that the sky is not blue, and that the only reason we associate the color blue with the sky is because we are told that blue is the sky's color...Buddists can believe that all day long...I wouldn't want them certified to teach kindergarden to my kids if they would insist on teaching my kids that the sky is not blue. This lady was unable to see past her own hang-ups and help someone who was coming to her for help...thats a bad counselor. If you can't counsel alcoholics because you are an alcoholic...you have no business trying to be a counselor.

My personal opinion is that counseling is a gift. It is not something learned in the secular arena of the world. Either you have it, or you don't. Attempting to learn, or divine that gift at the hands of a University, or seeking their approval is a step in the wrong direction. I would NEVER go outside of my church or my family for counseling.

[Matthitjah]

You're missing the point completely.

As a Christian one of us may have complete disdain for the homosexual lifestyle for various reasons. We may even have it in our past that we were abused or have had some other misconception. It doesn't matter why and the Word is quite clear though, that if this behaviour or mindeset is going to trip us up whether it be through anger, or what have you, we are to avoid it. Maybe she's like an alcoholic around homosexuals and can't trust herself. Regardless, in our Faith it's not up to you and I to decide her conscience in this regard and neither can the court force her to abandon her inalienable right to Freedom of Religion.

At least I got you to quit claiming that she didn't refuse to see the client. Which WAS my point. In order for this to be religious persecution you would have to prove that others are routinely allowed to refuse clients for personal reasons. There is no evidence that has happened. She was terminated because she allowed her personal bias to get in the way of helping someone. The university is allowed to have standards. If she wanted to get a degree that would allow her to pick and choose what kinds of people she could help...she should have chosen to go to a school with different standards.

Now...onto your religious freedom. I assume then that you are okay with Muslims getting medical degrees even if they refuse to participate in industry standardized pre-op wash-up techniques. Female muslim students refused to wash their arms and hands past their wrists before surgical proceedures, and then refused to wear gloves past their wrists. They were removed from their classes...but according to you they have the religious freedom to refuse proper surgical cleaning routines and it is NOT up to you , or I, or the University to decide their conscience in this regard...and they cannot be forced by the court to abandon their inalienable right to Freedom of religion. I think thats ludicrous.

This woman may believe whatever she wants. You could be a Zen Buddist who believes that the sky is not blue, and that the only reason we associate the color blue with the sky is because we are told that blue is the sky's color...Buddists can believe that all day long...I wouldn't want them certified to teach kindergarden to my kids if they would insist on teaching my kids that the sky is not blue. This lady was unable to see past her own hang-ups and help someone who was coming to her for help...thats a bad counselor. If you can't counsel alcoholics because you are an alcoholic...you have no business trying to be a counselor.

My personal opinion is that counseling is a gift. It is not something learned in the secular arena of the world. Either you have it, or you don't. Attempting to learn, or divine that gift at the hands of a University, or seeking their approval is a step in the wrong direction. I would NEVER go outside of my church or my family for counseling.

Axx,

I believe that you might be the kind of guy that would argue with a tree if it would stand still long enough.

However, I do not conceed that she refused to counsel the client due to bias. She refused in protest after she refused the ACA's "right minded thinking". They probably told her to tell the man or woman that Homosexuality was a perfectly normal and acceptable lifestyle. Regardless, I will take my sisters testimony over that of a secular court and the ACA.

I agree with you about counseling. If Jesus can't deal with my problem then I don't want any answers from the world. However, there are very fine Christian Counselors out there and I know one personally that I wouldn't hesitate sending a family member or friend to.

Now you'll have to excuse me because there's a White Birch in the back yard that need's a good talking to.

peace,

dave

[Axxman]

I believe that you might be the kind of guy that would argue with a tree if it would stand still long enough.

When a tree is wrong...somebody has to tell it!

However, I do not conceed that she refused to counsel the client due to bias. She refused in protest after she refused the ACA's "right minded thinking". They probably told her to tell the man or woman that Homosexuality was a perfectly normal and acceptable lifestyle. Regardless, I will take my sisters testimony over that of a secular court and the ACA.

OUR sister's testimony is clear...she refused to see the client because she read in his file that he was homosexual. The fact that you used the word "probably" speaks volumes. It means you clearly haven't read her testimony, nor the evidence presented to court. There is NO probably. She definitely refused to see a depressed client because she had read that the client was homosexual. She asked her supervisor to cancel the appointment within 2 hours of the scheduled appearance...and the supervisor did. Not once, in any way, was she asked to affirm homosexuality or to change her beliefs. She was told she needs remedial training because she allowed her personal bias to interfere with her job. The school has repeatedly asserted that she has a right to her beliefs and that she is not being challenged on that front...and the court agreed citing evidence that the school was giving her straight A's. She got in trouble because a counselor should be able to see past personal bias and help people to the best of their abilities. A counselor who has a list of people they refuse to help...shouldn't be a counselor.

I agree with you about counseling. If Jesus can't deal with my problem then I don't want any answers from the world. However, there are very fine Christian Counselors out there and I know one personally that I wouldn't hesitate sending a family member or friend to.

Just to clarify...I totally agree with Christian counseling. I have made use of the counselors in my church. <---- See, we can agree on stuff...lol