Massachusetts Court Rules Religious School Must Hire Homosexuals for Non-Teaching Positions

Fontbonne-compressedBOSTON — A state court in Massachusetts has ruled that a religious school in the state can’t decline to hire homosexuals for non-teaching positions despite their lifestyle being contrary to the school’s mission and beliefs.

In 2013, Matthew Barrett accepted a job as food service director at Fontbonne Academy in Milton, an all-girls school that is sponsored by the Roman Catholic Sisters of Saint Joseph of Boston. However, when he listed his “husband” as his emergency contact on his initial employment forms, the job offer was rescinded because his lifestyle ran contrary to the school’s values.

Barrett then sued the school, alleging discrimination. Fontbonne Academy argued that it had a right to hire those in accordance with Roman Catholic teachings, as it believes that homosexual behavior is sinful. It said that being forced to hire those engaged in open homosexuality would violate their First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion and freedom of association.

On Wednesday, Superior Court Associate Justice Douglas Wilkins ruled against Fontbonne Academy, agreeing that Barrett had been discriminated against. One of his reasons for ruling against the school was that Barrett was hired for a non-teaching position.

“As an educational institution, Fontbonne retains control over its mission and message,” Wilkins wrote. “It is not forced to allow Barrett to dilute that message, where he will not be a teacher, minister or spokesman for Fontbonne and has not engaged in public advocacy of same-sex marriage.”

He noted that the school also hires those that are not Roman Catholic, and that Barrett was never asked to sign a contract to live in accordance with the school’s values.

“He was not denied employment for any advocacy of same-sex marriage or gay rights; he only listed his husband as an emergency contact on a ‘new hire’ form,” Wilkins said.

  • Connect with Christian News

Barrett applauded the decision, telling reporters, “What happened to me was wrong, and I truly hope it doesn’t happen to anyone else.”

But Roman Catholic groups and others said that they were disappointed with what the decision means for religious liberty.

“Religious liberty is guaranteed not only by the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but even more broadly, by Article II of the Declaration of Rights of the Massachusetts Constitution,” said Catholic Action League Executive Director C. J. Doyle in a statement. “Religious freedom consists not merely of the right to worship, but of the right of religious institutions to govern their internal affairs free of state interference.”

“Judge Wilkins’s decision would compel Catholic institutions to hire those who reject and despise Catholic teaching, fatally impairing the constitutionally protected right of those institutions to carry on their mission,” he continued. “This is precisely the sort of ‘excessive entanglement’ of government with religion decried and prohibited by the U.S. Supreme Court…”

Fontbonne Academy says that it is considering its appeal options.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • 201821208 :)

    “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.” Rom. 1:26-27

  • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

    So now it is permissible to lie on employment application forms? A man says he has a “husband”, and he must be hired, even though a patent falsehood. The supreme court lies, and now suddenly everyone must parrot their stupid lie: the government religion trumps all other religion.

    • Becky

      Amen!

      Exhibit A: the blind leading the blind.

    • acontraryview

      Emergency Contact: . Relationship: Spouse

      If they are legally married, how is that lying?

      “The supreme court lies”

      What lie did the Supreme Court put forth?

      “the government religion trumps all other religions”

      What government religion?

      • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

        Do you intend to show yourself clever or stupid by asking questions that have obvious answers? Is it possible that you simply don’t bother to think through the views that others hold? Is it possible that you don’t have a view of your own? Does acting stupid and not saying what you mean work for you in your chosen career?

        • acontraryview

          So you can’t say how listing a person you are legally married to as your spouse is a lie. Nor can you state how the Supreme Court has lied. Nor can you state what government religion exists.

          Does making statements you can’t back up work for you in your chosen career?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Dear Troll, in my chosen career, I do not work with petulant children, so I am able to treat my co-workers as competent people, and let them join the dots themselves. To assert that I did not answer your diversion and therefore cannot (“so you can’t”) is logically unsound.

          • mantis

            if you can answer than answer, your deflections just prove you have nothing to offer

          • acontraryview

            Does making statements and then saying that you can back them up, but you won’t, work for you in your chosen field? Kind of reminds me of a 4-year old saying: “Cause I don’t wanna!” Talk about petulant children!

            So, please, prove me wrong. Tell how labeling a person you are legally married to as your spouse is a lie. And what is it the Supreme Court has lied about?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            This style of argument is called “shifting the burden of proof”. The burden of proof is on you: you say this perverse domestic arrangement is a true marriage, but it never has been, and it cannot be. You have nothing on your side except the unlawful posturing of your friends. Significantly, you do not have the truth on your side: God defined marriage in the beginning. What difference can your unsupported claims make to him?

          • acontraryview

            “This style of argument is called “shifting the burden of proof”.”

            LOL. Please tell me how asking you to explain statements you made is “shifting the burden of proof”.

            “you say this perverse domestic arrangement is a true marriage, but it never has been, and it cannot be.”

            No, I said that listing someone as a spouse if you are legally married to that person would be the truth, not a lie.

            Unfortunate that you are not able/willing to provide a basis for your statements. It points to the weakness of your argument.

            “What difference can your unsupported claims make to him?”

            What unsupported claims?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            If you are speaking the truth in your “questions” then you should prove it. Prove it. Prove your point.

          • acontraryview

            Get back to me when you are able to explain how listing a person one is legally married to as “spouse” on a form is lying, and what it is you believe the Supreme Court lied about.

            Oh, and when you are able to cite what “unsupported claims” you are referring to.

            Hilarious that you accuse me of “shifting the burden of proof”. Do you not see how transparent, and desperate, your replies are becoming?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            I wrote an answer, but found I was repeating myself. I’d rather not repeat myself.

          • acontraryview

            You have written no answer as to why listing someone as “spouse” that one is legally married to is a lie. Further, you have provided no answer as to what the Supreme Court has lied about. Finally, you have failed to cite what “unsupported claims” I have made.

            Addressing those issues would not be repeating yourself. It would be doing so for the first time.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            This supposed “legal marriage” is not a marriage. You are claiming it is, which is a false claim, which you share with the rebellious Supreme Court. Saying it is so, and listing lost souls that agree with you, does not make it so. You should prove that it is a marriage: but you can’t.

          • acontraryview

            “This supposed “legal marriage””

            It not a “supposed” legal marriage. It actually IS a legal marriage.

            “is not a marriage.”

            While you are certainly entitled to you opinion regarding that, your opinion does not change the fact that the marriage is a legal one, and therefore “spouse” is NOT a lie.

            “Saying it is so, and listing lost souls that agree with you, does not make it so.”

            Agreed. What makes it so is the law. Your saying that it is not most certainly does not make it not.

            “You should prove that it is a marriage: but you can’t.”

            Since those same-gender couples who have entered into civil marriage have a license from the state to do so, that is proof that they are, indeed, legally married. So, yes I can, and I just did.

            Now, what did the Supreme Court lie about and what unsupported claims have I made.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Legal opinion can no more create a marriage between two men than homosexual acts between two can create children.

          • acontraryview

            “Legal opinion can no more create a marriage between two men”

            Correct. Legal opinion does not create a civil marriage. The receipt of a state issued marriage license creates a civil marriage. And, in case you haven’t been keeping up, two citizens of the same gender are allowed to enter into civil marriage. Their marriage is legal.

            “homosexual acts between two can create children.”

            Neither can heterosexual acts between two people where either is infertile. How is that relevant to the issue of the legality of their marriage?

            I’ll ask again:

            What did the Supreme Court lie about and what unsupported claims have I made?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Marriage protects the bond that creates children. Without the bond there can be no children and there can be no marriage. Marriage does not rest on the children, nor the state of Massachusetts nor the union for its current court. Messing with definitions is the stuff of lying.

          • acontraryview

            “Marriage protects the bond that creates children.”

            As divorce rates clearly show, that statement is false.

            “Without the bond there can be no children and there can be no marriage.”

            Since being legally married is not a requirement for having children, your statement is false. In addition, since having children is not a requirement for civil marriage, those who are legally married but do not have children are still legally married. Again, your statement is false.

            “Marriage does not rest on the children”

            Which proves my points and disproves yours.

            “Messing with definitions is the stuff of lying.”

            So when laws were struck down that defined marriage as only between two people of the same race, that was lying? When the definition of marriage was changed from two citizens without reference to gender, to be two citizens only of opposite gender, that was lying?

            No, Martin, “messing with definitions” is not the stuff of lying. Lying is the stuff of lying. You have yet to show how listing a person as “spouse” when one is legally married to that person is “lying”. Nor have you cited what lies the Supreme Court has told. Nor have you cited what unsupported claims I have made.

            Is that because those statements were lies?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            So you don’t want answers to your questions. You want agreement with your position. Perhaps you should say so, instead of putting up a false front of interest. (Divorce destroys the marriage, therefore marriage is not a bond … wow … that’s logic you have to feel, rather than think about.)

          • acontraryview

            I’ll ask again:

            What did the Supreme Court lie about and what unsupported claims have I made?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Now you are claiming that you are answering a question. You are further claiming that your questions have not been answered. Your lips are moving.

          • acontraryview

            “You are further claiming that your questions have not been answered.”

            They haven’t. So I’ll ask again:

            Why is a lie to list on a form someone who you are legally married to as your spouse? What is it the Supreme Court lied about? What unsupported claims have I made?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Your medication is interfering with your ability to read.

          • acontraryview

            Ahhhh…personal attacks. A last gasp effort from a person who is unable to support their claims. Adorable. Sad, but adorable.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            You haven’t answered my statement about your medication.

          • acontraryview

            In addition to failing to support your claims, it is clear you also have a limited understanding the English language. Perhaps this will help:

            An “answer” is provided to a question. You didn’t ask a question. Therefore, no “answer” would be provided. Rather, you made a statement. A statement may, or may not, receive a “response”. In the case of your puerile statement, a response was provided.

            Get back to me when you are able to provide “answers” to the “questions” I asked you about the “statements” you made.

            In case you have forgotten the questions during your multiple attempts at diversion, here they are again:

            “Why is it a lie to list on a form someone who you are legally married to as your spouse? What is it the Supreme Court lied about? What unsupported claims have I made?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            You cannot respond because you don’t have a response.

          • acontraryview

            But I did respond which can be clearly seen above. Your statement that I did not is false.

            Now, back to my questions to you:

            “Why is it a lie to list on a form someone who you are legally married to as your spouse? What is it the Supreme Court lied about? What unsupported claims have I made?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            No, back to my original statement.

          • acontraryview

            ‘No, back to my original statement.”

            The one where you said it is a lie to identify on a form a person you are legally married to as “spouse”? The one where you said that the Supreme Court lied?

            Yes, you provided no response to my questions regarding your original statements.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Lol – you made me look. No, that’s what you said, not what I said.

          • acontraryview

            Here’s your original post:

            “A man says he has a “husband”, and he must be hired, even though it is a patent falsehood. The supreme court lies”

            So, yes, you did say that listing someone you are legally married to as “spouse” is a lie. And you did say the Supreme Court lied.

            A few responses later you said: “What difference can your unsupported claims make to him?”

            So, I’ll ask again:

            Why is it a lie to list on a form someone who you are legally married to as your spouse? What is it the Supreme Court lied about? What unsupported claims have I made?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Words have meaning. I did not use your words. “Patent” has a meaning, and is the answer to your question.

          • acontraryview

            “”Patent” has a meaning, and is the answer to your question.”

            That is not an answer to my questions. That is a restatement of your assertion.

            So I’ll ask again:

            Why is it a lie to list on a form someone who you are legally married to as your spouse? What is it the Supreme Court lied about? What unsupported claims have I made?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            No, it’s an answer. It makes your “question” a statement roughly equivalent to “I didn’t pay attention in school and I don’t have a dictionary”.

          • acontraryview

            All you did was restate your position. You did not explain why you view it as a lie. Nor did you answer the question as to what the SCOTUS lied about. Nor did you answer the question regarding what unsupported claims I made.

            Can you not answer these questions?

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            Patent. Marriage. Troll. Troll.

          • acontraryview

            If you can’t answer, you can’t answer. No worries.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            That was 4 answers. If you can’t understand it, no worries.

          • acontraryview

            LOL

            Please cite where you have stated why it is a lie to refer to someone you are legally married to as your spouse if that person is of the same gender.

            Please cite where you have stated what the Supreme Court has lied about.

            Please cite where you have stated what unsupported claims I have made.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            LOL. So the deal is stupid, repeat, ask, lol, rant loop repeat. Please cite where you have said something original (apart from twisting “husband” into “spouse”).

          • acontraryview

            So still not able to answer the questions I asked about the statements you made. Predictable. Oh well.

          • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

            repeat

    • NGN

      not a falsehood at all…just your bigoted opinion…..too funny

  • https://disqus.com/home/channel/beckhamreport/ James Beckham

    Sick. The anti-Christian gays continue their march against Christianity.

    • gizmo23

      If it is Christianity filled with bigots then good for them

      • afchief

        It’s not bigotry to point out scripture that states homosexuality is sin. If we Christians do not point out to gays that their lifestyle is contrary to God, nature and the end result of this lifestyle is eternal punishment, we Christians will stand before God and have to answer to Him as to why we did not tell them the truth.

        Ezekiel 33:8-9 (NASB) When I say to the wicked, ‘O wicked man, you will surely die,’ and you do not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require from your hand. 9 But if you on your part warn a wicked man to turn from his way and he does not turn from his way, he will die in his iniquity, but you have delivered your life.

        • gizmo23

          Pointing out is one thing, trying to hurt is another

          • afchief

            Who is trying to hurt?

          • gizmo23

            Many people

          • afchief

            Stop spreading lies.

          • gizmo23

            You would love to see gays have zero rights

          • afchief

            It is not about rights. Marriage has already been defined. Marriage will never equal two men or two women or whatever. Call it civil unions or something else, but you cannot call it marriage. It is NOT possible!

          • gizmo23

            How about oyher rights Housing, work, etc.

            Definitions of marriage has changed many times

          • afchief

            Marriage has never changed

          • NGN

            its just become more inclusive…Thankfully

          • rightfighter

            Yes, Love has never changed.

          • NGN

            sure we can. its legal throughout the USA and comes with all of the legal benefits….

          • afchief

            Ahhh yes, the Word of God is soooooo true about the reprobate mind…………it never stops lying!!!!!

          • NGN

            as evidenced by yourself

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Those who try to make a homosexual hetero, it’s called brainwashing. And let’s not forget, words can hurt too.

          • afchief

            I’m not trying to hurt you. I’m trying to warn you that if you continue in this lifestyle it will have eternal consequences. You were NOT born this way. There is NO gay gene. Homosexuality is slavery. There is no peace while you live in this sin. This is why you come to Christian websites seeking affirmation of your lifestyle. Deep down you know it is wrong. Yet, you do not want to be told it is wrong. You want and need for us Christians to tell you God made you this way. He did not. We will tell you that God loves you and has provided a way out of this lifestyle through His Son Jesus Christ. In Him you will find freedom and peace. In homosexuality you will find anguish, hurt, and death.

            It kills both physically and spiritually. Choose life and live!!!!

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Roflmao!! Damn almost spilled my coffee reading this, sorry to use this word, crap. First I’m hetero, just think that homosexuals should have the exact same rights as we do. Second, when I find an article on this or any other christian board regarding homosexuals I go there to find out if all you christians are the same, prejudice towards people who are not the same or think the same as you christians do. Some are not, but then again to those who are prejudice, those are not real christians. But christians like you, yep you never dissapoint me.

          • afchief

            Is it prejudice for us to quote the Word of God and what it says about homosexuality? We know what this lifestyle does to a person. We know what sin is and how it blinds and enslaves. There is only freedom in Jesus Christ.

            I believe you are homosexual and are looking for truth. You are looking for help. You want out but the desire and control is so strong. There is a way out. There is freedom. Give your life to Jesus and He will set you free.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            As I said on another comment to you. Whatever floats your boat.

          • afchief

            Why do you have today off? You have the day off today because of Christ.

            Now perhaps you don’t believe in Christ, or God at all. That’s a personal decision only you can make.

            But, how often do you hear people say “well there’s no tangible proof — and no benefit to me.” Ah, but there is. You still got the day off.

            So whether this is really a celebration of the Son of Man and Son of God, whether it’s the wrong day or not (and if you have any interest in history, astrophysics and such — it is), irrespective of any of those things, you still got a benefit.

            A tangible one — right here, right now, today.

            Oh, and for those of you who wish to secular the holiday?

            Merry CHRISTmas

            It’s ALL about Christ!!!!!

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So having a day or two off is proof that your God, Christ existed? Riiiiiiight.

          • NGN

            nope. govt sanctioned holiday..nothing more…am actually working for the time and a half

          • afchief

            You are quite the liar!!!! Everything you post is a lie!!

            What does CHRIST-mas mean???????????

            I’ll give you 3 guesses!!!!

          • NGN

            govt sanctioned holiday…nothing more

          • afchief

            You just proved that you are a LIAR!!!!

          • NGN

            nopers

          • Barry Boucher

            I can’t believe this guy, maybe he’s a westboro baptise with the signs ” God hates fags” or not maybe he needs just to get his head out of the bible and the heart back in so he can hear the true word of God. I know it’s hard to humble yourself and your sense of pride. It takes real humility to hear the word of God. But you know it when you do and it always takes you to a place you never been. God is so much bigger than ourselves stop trying to put him in a box of useless laws that doesn’t benefit the soul but condems it. And look through the eyes of Christ which exceeds beyond our boxes and even the universe all created by Him, yes I mean Christ.

          • afchief

            Sooo sad…..another liar with a reprobate mind!!!!

            There Is No Such Thing As a “Gay” Christian

            By Greg May

            In a previous article (“Information Highway: Avenue of False Doctrine”) I voiced my concern over the growing number of websites on the Internet promoting false doctrine. Also increasing in number are gay “Christian” websites.

            There is no such thing as a “gay” Christian. Homosexuality is a sin according to God’s Word. It is condemned in both Old and New Testaments. In Old Testament times, people who practiced homosexuality were to be taken outside the walls of the city and stoned to death. It was the rampant promiscuity of this lifestyle that caused God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah:

            And the Lord said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is Great, and because their sin is very grave…” (Genesis 18:20).

            The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the Flood in the time of Noah are examples of the coming judgment upon the world as recorded in the book of Revelation. Just as Noah and his family were put inside the Ark before the Flood, and Lot’s family were sent away before burning sulphur fell on Sodom and Gomorrah, so will God’s people be removed from earth when Jesus appears in the clouds during the Rapture.

            There is a striking similarity between the days of Noah and Lot and the conditions of the world today: The economy was prospering, business was good and the construction industry was flourishing. Violence was widespread and the pursuit of pleasure was the main objective: “If it feels good do it!”

            Homosexuality and immorality were proliferating as well.

            Paul wrote in the New Testament:

            “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet” (Romans 1:26, 27)

            “…and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions”: Could Paul have been prophesying about AIDS?

            Today our society glamorizes the lifestyle; celebrities are applauded when they “come out of the closet” and others are persecuted when they speak out against the gay lifestyle.

            The late Patrick Heron once wrote, “I would hope that people with opposing views would be tolerant of the Christian position. After all, we are constantly being asked to be tolerant of the gay community.”

            I remember watching on TV news back in the 70s when a member of the gay community pushed a pie in Anita Bryant’s face when she spoke out against gay rights issues in Florida. Today the gay community is bringing lawsuits against people who don’t go along with their agenda.

            Satan is the master of deceit and the father of lies. He has a talent for presenting something that goes against God’s will in a nice gift-wrapped package for people to sample.

            The disco 70s did more to make “being gay okay”’ than anything else. The disco movement which was widely supported by the gay community burst upon the American pop culture scene like an atomic bomb. Now it was the “in thing” to dance at gay clubs because, “They always have the best music” and gay people know how to “party” better than anyone else.

            Two of the most prominent “Disco Queens” – Gloria Gaynor and the late Donna Summer became born-again Christians. In fact, Summer’s career took a nosedive when she confronted her gay audience during a concert telling them, “AIDS is your sin.” But Grace Jones continues to exploit her androgynous look and popularity with the gay community to promote her career; and her father and brother are both ministers.

            Female impersonators are being paraded everywhere and are now featured in mainstream entertainment. Recently, a female impersonator was quoted in the media as being a “drag queen for Jesus” and ABC TV’s Diane Sawyer presented a full-length interview with former Olympic star Bruce Jenner who is changing his sex.

            God loves the sinner but He hates the sin.

            Jesus went to the cross and died for all; anyone can be saved if they call upon the name of the Lord. Mary Magdalene was caught in adultery in which the penalty was death. But Jesus didn’t condemn her – in fact, He pardoned her. It was Mary Magdalene who stayed at the foot of the cross after Jesus’ disciples left.

            In the past, churches shied away from reaching out to the gay community. Today there are ministries that are being offered at many churches to bring men and women out of the lifestyle of sin and darkness and into the light and joy of God’s Word.

            Those who claim homosexuality is not a sin in God’s eyes are blinded by Satan.

            The love that David and Jonathan had for each other in the Bible is often misconstrued by the gay community to suggest they were lovers.

            “I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women” (2 Samuel 1:26)

            The love that David and Jonathan had was a supernatural and pure love in the form of a godly covenant between them – they were not homosexuals.

            “And they two made a covenant before the Lord” (1 Samuel 23: 18).

            Jonathan loved David beyond the love he had for women and also beyond the love for his father and his own life, just as Christ commanded us to love Him:

            “If any man comes to Me, and does not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

            God’s Word makes it unmistakably clear that homosexuals will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven:

            “. . . for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers – and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine . . .” (1 Timothy 1:10).

            In these last days we need to be about the Father’s business which is winning souls for Christ. Although the Bible makes it clear homosexuals will have no place in God’s Kingdom, He makes a way for the sinner to be cleansed and washed white as snow by the redemptive Blood of the Lamb that was shed when Jesus was crucified at Calvary.

          • Barry Boucher

            You still didn’t answer my question. Why is the blood of the lamb powerful enough to cover your sins but not of a homosexual, and don’t tell me because you don’t repeat your sins over and over again

          • afchief

            The blood of Jesus will cover any sin!!! Remember when Jesus said “go and sin no more”? You cannot call yourself a Christian and still be a practicing homosexual. It is not possible. Jesus can and will set you free from this sin of homosexuality.

            Just ask Him and believe!!!!

          • rightfighter

            Since God never had a wife He also never had a son. “Jesus” does NOT exist. Your “Bible” was mistranslated by men that couldn’t read Greek and Hebrew.

          • Bob Johnson

            No True Scotsmen Fallicy

          • NGN

            so you plagiarize others work because you have no original thoughts..got it!

          • afchief

            Poor liberal homo, the truth is the truth and I speak the truth!!!

          • NGN

            silly conservative thumper, the facts are for those who understand them..you obviously do not……keep up the plagiarism…keeps us entertained

          • rightfighter

            Christmas is a Pagan holiday stolen by the Christians.

          • Bob Johnson

            see above. I placed comment under wrong person.

          • Bob Johnson

            Yes, reading afchief in the morning does tend to put coffee on my screen. Sorry for the delayed response – spent Christmas Day with friends and family.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Yep, but he is not the only one who got that effect on me. I mean spilling my coffee. 😉 😉 😉 delated Merry Christmas!

          • afchief

            That’s because the truth always offends! Does it not?

          • Barry Boucher

            Love your comment jolanda

          • Barry Boucher

            I pray you pay attention to your own sins as intently you do to others, but I suspect not.

          • afchief

            Another liar and reprobate mind!!! Wonder why the Gay Agenda has gained such a strong foothold in America especially since President 0lawless took office. The following link will give you insight into LGBT strategy to get into places of great power in every branch of Government. It is called the Presidential Project. The power they have gained access to is cause for alarm and why we Christians must fast and pray!

            To date, the Oliar-Biden Administration has appointed more than 250 openly LGBT professionals to full-time and advisory positions in the executive branch; more than all known LGBT appointments of other presidential administrations combined. See why this was possible at the link below and what areas of Government they have pursued and secured.

            The Presidential Project: http://www.victoryinstitute. org/programs/presidential

        • Barry Boucher

          Stay out of the Old Testament, that’s why it’s called old. Besides you don’t have the wisdom to understand it’s intended purpose because you don’t have the ears to hear the living gospel of Christ placed in your heart, foolish man. just the writings of dead men who were also sinners and carried their carnal thoughts into their writings. Why do you think they couldn’t agree even amongst themselves, having walked with the lord and being called disciples. The written word will be destroyed just like everything on this earth but the gospel written on the tablets of your heart are eternal wisdom calls have ears to hear.

          • afchief

            You are typical of other homosexuals I see on forums. They think the New Testament says nothing about homosexuality. They go to homo friendly websites and post lies about the sin of homosexuality. But there is scripture saying homosexuality is sin. This lifestyle is perverted, deviant and VERY dangerous. There is nothing wholesome or moral about it. NOTHING!!!!

  • Guest

    Case was decided according to state law. If the school wanted to qualify as a religious organization with the ability to discriminate in hiring then it must ‘limit membership, enrollment, admission or participation to members of that religion.”

    Basically they can’t claim to be a religious organization and cater to those who aren’t their religion. This is a secular business owned by a religious organization and is not exempt from civil rights laws.

  • Nidalap

    Hmm…wonder how long it will be before we start hearing the complaints about how they’re constantly being bombarded by Christian messages there…

    • Josey

      good maybe some Christian messages would be good for the guy, change his mind on his lifestyle. ha.

      • acontraryview

        Oh yeah. That has proven SOOOOOO effective.

    • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

      Good luck….it’s a Roman Catholic school.

  • BarkingDawg

    What if the school declined to hire someone just because they “look gay?”

    • Josey

      really? that is ridiculous and won’t happen. This guy put his man husband down as the emergency contact which is what brought the attention to it.

      • BarkingDawg

        And other than the basic information, exactly what buisness is it it to the employer who that person is?

      • gizmo23

        You don’t think that happens? It happens all the time in schools. I’ve been asked if I was gay because I worked for a florist

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Seriously? Talking about stereotyping. It’s like when you’re a male hairdresser you must be gay.

          • NGN

            one of my favorites

      • mantis

        so he shouldn’t of listed the man he was legally married to as his contact? who should he have listed then?

        • Josey

          that wasn’t the point, comprehend what I said in replying to barkingdawg. barkingdawg said, “what if the school declined to hire someone just because they look gay?” and I answered that was ridiculous and that the only reason they knew this guy was gay was that he put down his man wife or husband however they call each other down as the contact, not by the appearance of the guy. you shills are always looking for some argument that has nothing to do with a hill of beans concerning the article being commented on.

  • mathewsjw

    next up Catholics Must hire Gay Priests… because there is no difference in the Catholic church

    • Ambulance Chaser

      No, because the membership in the Catholic Church is limited and thus, the Church is not subject to anti-discrimination laws.

      • mathewsjw

        wrong according to Obama/DoJ/socialists discrimination is not allowed by Catholics, btw the Gay refused in hiring was Catholic

  • afchief

    Why are “GAY” people always after Christians and our countries morals?

    I know.

    They’ve suppressed the truth.
    Their foolish hearts have become darkened.
    They have dishonored their own bodies among themselves.
    They exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature and God.
    They commit shameless acts with debased minds.

    That’s why.

    • Jolanda Tiellemans

      Roflmao! They just want the same rights you have. They just want a job just like all of us, without being discriminated because of their sexual orientation.

      • afchief

        Marriage has already been defined! Call it civil unions or whatever you want. But you can’t call it marriage. It will never be marriage.

        Our morality is the weapon the homosexual fears most. Because of their lack of morality and to obtain morality they would have to become one of us. Which is not possible without renouncing your lifestyle!

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Roflmao! Yeah right, only you christians have morals. Christian parents who throw their teen son out of the house cause he is gay. But yeah you Christian are the ones with morals. Right!

          Oh and my lifestyle, is the same as yours, I’m straight. I just believe homosexuals should have the same rights as you and I.

          • afchief

            Homosexuality is not moral. We Christians are not perfect and do make mistakes. But He who lives within us, IS perfect.

            If my son said he was a homosexual I would not throw him out of my house. I would still love him and continue to love him. But I would tell him that the road he is on has eternal consequences. That God did not make him that way. And there is freedom in Jesus Christ.

            Besides, studies I have read state that the majority of people turning to homosexuality were sexually abused at a young age, the father left the home or something dramatic happened in their life.

            No one is born gay. NO ONE!!!

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            And again with the stereotyping. Have you ever asked that majority? Oh no wait you rather believe what studies tell you instead asking those who know best, homosexuals.

          • afchief

            When you are living in sin, you are blind to that sin. As you continue in it your heart grows harder. It begins to control you. You obey it’s lusts. Deep down you know it is wrong. But the desire/control is so strong you deceive yourself believing this has to be right. You start to tell yourself that God had to make you this way. It has to be. There is no other explanation for it. So you begin to suppress the truth. You begin to lash out at people who call this lifestyle sin. Yet deep down you know something is not right. You go to Christian websites searching for affirmation of your lifestyle. You do not find it. But you keep searching for affirmation and it never comes. The hatred for others who oppose your lifestyle grows more.

            You know the truth, but have suppressed it with sin. Freedom is available and His name is Jesus Christ. He does not hate you. His arms are open wide. He is waiting for you. The choice is yours

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So you never asked the majority and rather believe what studies tell you? Right.

          • afchief

            I believe the Word of God because it is truth!!! It does not lie! Any rational and logical mind can look at a woman and a man and see that they were made to come together. A reprobate, deceived and spiritually blind mind looks at two men and thinks it is all about love not realizing that they were NOT made to come together and when they do is causes death. Physical and spiritual.

            There is slavery, disease and death in homosexuality. There is freedom in Jesus Christ.

            The choice is yours.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Still not answering my question. Not surprised.

          • Barry Boucher

            👎🙏🙉🙈🙊

          • afchief

            The truth always offends!!! Does it not???

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Your truth? Nope, just having a good laugh everytime I read your comments. Cause it’s sooooooo ridiculous!

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            There is love and affection in homosexuality. Oh damn the same things as in a hetero relationship, go figure.

          • afchief

            Once an institution can be redefined by people who wish to be included in it, it is no longer the institution to which they wish to belong. If girls are allowed into the Boy Scouts, it is no longer the Boy Scouts. If men are allowed into sororities, they are no longer sororities. And so on.

            Marriage has had a definition since the beginning as being between a man and a woman. Nowhere in any ancient society has homosexuality been elevated as normal except in societies at the peak of modern bloat and excess and in full decline- the latter days of Rome, ancient Greece, and so on. It is a hallmark of a society that has jumped the rails and is headed over the cliff. The the USA next?

            If marriage can now be defined as whatever union anyone wants it to be, it is meaningless. Two people of the same sex pretending to be married does not make a marriage anymore than pretending motor oil is edible will make my salad taste better.

            Things are what they are despite our efforts to redefine them. Civil unions grant gays everything they claim to want, but getting what they want is not the goal. The larger purpose of redefining marriage is to make God increasingly irrelevant as we take His word and fling it back in His face, making ourselves our own gods.

          • NGN

            not anymore chef. legal to marry the same sex now…..are you butt hurt?

          • NGN

            Love your ridiculous parroted reply. Nobody wants or needs your affirmation……you are nobody, a faceless entity on the net…. ROTFLMAO!

          • Barry Boucher

            Holier than thou 🐴⚰💯

          • Barry Boucher

            Meant for alchief

          • afchief

            Then why are you on christian websites? You know we Christians will never change our minds about homosexuality! We KNOW it is sin. And we know the consequences of this sin. And we will continue to call it sin!!!

          • NGN

            as long as morons like you are perpetuating lies about the gay community, I will be posting on these sites.

          • afchief

            Lies? What lies? Show me where I’m lying about the gay community?

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            Show where you are telling the truth about the gay community?

          • afchief

            How about from the CDC?

            “Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs) have been rising among gay and bisexual men, with increases in syphilis being seen across the country. In 2013, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men accounted for 75% of primary and secondary syphilis cases in the United States. Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men often get other STDs, including chlamydia and gonorrhea infections. HPV (Human papillomavirus), the most common STD in the United States, is also a concern for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. Some types of HPV can cause genital and anal warts and some can lead to the development of anal and oral cancers. Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men are 17 times more likely to get anal cancer than heterosexual men. Men who are HIV-positive are even more likely than those who do not have HIV to get anal cancer.”

            http://www.cdc. gov/msmhealth/std.htm

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So you not only cherry pick your bible? You do the same thing with what CDC writes. This is not general health, I mean the whole population, you’re targeting gay and bisexuals. How about putting up sexual transmitted diseases by hetero couples. You know they have anal sex too and blow jobs, right?

          • afchief

            Do homosexuals ever stop lying? Homos are 17 to 1 more likely to develop anal cancer than hetros and yet they are only 2% of the population. Do the math!!!!

            This is one of Homosexuals favorites lies….hetros do it too. That is a boldface lie!!!!!

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            I just asked you to put up also the health risk heteroes could have when having sex, how is that lying.

            Uhm, I’m hetero and I had anal sex. AWESOME!!!! Oh and blowjobs.

          • afchief

            Romans 1:24-28 (NASB) Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

            26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

            28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So you can’t provide what I asked for and you come with bible quotes. Am I surprised, nope. It’s very common by Christians like you.

          • afchief

            Your post will be deleted shortly. It is disgusting. But, it does prove the Word of God sooooo true…..”God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them”

            It is sooooo true!!!

            You better change your ways, because you are playing with fire!!!! The anal muscle is what’s known as a “round muscle”. Think of it as being like a rubber band, rather than a sheet stretching from one area to another. These muscles have a very specific design and function. They are meant to keep things closed.

            If that muscle is stretched, it develops microtears. Now with a regular muscle, microtears mend and the muscle is built up, which is how exercise gets you toned and/or built. Round muscles don’t work that way. Microtears never fully heal, and the entire muscle is weakened.

            That is *why* gay men end up needing diapers over time. The anal muscle can no longer close tightly enough to prevent leakage.

            Sad!

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So you had never sex cause it is disgusting? Got it. Nope no need to change my ways, I’m healhty in body and mind. Have been single my whole life,my choice. Had some boyfriends though, when I was younger. But never married and no kids and it’s great.

            So you also think that gays have anal sex all the time? Wow, you could educate me, you seem to know a lot about gay sex.

            Edit. Still there, my comment I mean. Having sex is a very natural thing, no matter what you do in the privacy of your own bedroom.

          • afchief

            One of God’s greatest gifts to us is our free will. He gave you the choice to live your life anyway you want to. But, we Christians are here to warn you that there is a price to pay when you leave this earth. Hebrews 9:27 (NASB) And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

            Jesus said “the way is straight and narrow that leads to life and few find it. The way is broad and wide that leads to hell and most take it.”

            Sin is for a season (this lifetime) Then there is a price to pay!

            Choose the narrow way and live. Tomorrow is not promised.

          • Barry Boucher

            And your beliefs are the only thing that matters, that’s how cults are rampant in this country, many disguised as Christian churches.

          • afchief

            Jesus is the ONLY reason that matters!!!!!

            John 14:6 (NASB) Jesus *said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

            You are quite blind to the truth because the God of this world (satan) has blinde your mind!!! It is obvious

            2 Corinthians 4:4 (NASB) in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

            Homosexuality is sin!! There is nothing moral or decent about it. It is perverted, deviant and very dangerous!!!

            Romans 1:18-28 (NASB) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

            24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

            26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

            28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

          • Barry Boucher

            Your out of your mind. You act like you don’t sin, what makes you think God has a moral scale on sin your sins are just as bad as any. And if a homosexual is born again what makes you think his weaknesses are worst than yours, going by your beliefs not mine

          • afchief

            The Case Against Homosexual Activity

            (Note: While this section is specifically about homosexuality, it was written in the knowledge that we are ALL imperfect beings who struggle, in our own individual ways, with immoral desires, whatever their causes.)

            Some of the most emotional and divisive issues in our society—specifically issues such as homosexual marriage, adoption by homosexuals, and other “gay rights” issues—revolve around two central and critical issues. Those issues are: is homosexual activity moral and “legalizeable” or immoral and “illegalizeable”?

            If we can rationally conclude that homosexual activity is moral and that it should be protected via legislation, then by logical extension we must also conclude that such things as homosexual marriage and adoption should likewise be legal.

            Conversely, if we can rationally conclude that homosexual activity is immoral and “illegalizeable,” then by logical extension we must also conclude that homosexual marriage and adoption should be illegal.

            Or, to frame it another way: We have laws against such things as consenting-adult polygamy, consenting-adult incest, consenting-adult prostitution, consenting-adult exhibitionism, etc. For around two hundred years we had laws against consenting-adult homosexual activity—and the country did just fine. Does the elimination of the laws against homosexual activity (and marriage and adoption) make any sense?

            In an effort to bring clarity to these issues and to help unify us around truth, rather than keep us divided by untruth and confusion, what follows is a rigorously logical analysis of those aforementioned central homosexual issues.

            To begin, a little history. For many many years in this country homosexual activity was deemed immoral and was not legal. It was only first decriminalized in Illinois in 1961. Other states eventually followed the precedent Illinois set. Also, for decades the American Psychiatric Association considered homosexuality a disorder. The APA only removed homosexuality from its official list of psychological disorders in 1973. The APA’s controversial decision to do so was nowhere near a unanimous decision by its then members because—just as a female mind in a male body and a male mind in a female body are sure signs that something went wrong somewhere, in either nature and/or nurture—a homosexual mind in a heterosexual body was widely considered to be a disorder. The associated fact that homosexuals were basically impotent with the opposite gender also was part of the equation.

            Now, why was homosexual activity deemed immoral and why wasn’t it legal? And why do so many people still deem homosexual activity immoral?

            For centuries, the position of “traditional value” people re homosexual activity essentially boils down to this: homosexual activity is a negative deviation from the reasonable heterosexual norm; and if we condone homosexual deviations then we must fairly allow other aberrant people their own particular deviations.

            Members of our group have debated many homosexuals and their supporters over the years and we are stunned at how many of them hold this hypocritical and contradictory position: It is okay to “discriminate” against sexual deviants like exhibitionists (e.g., people who masturbate or have sex in public) and incestuous couples, even if these deviants are consenting adults and even if they aren’t hurting anybody; but it is NOT okay to “discriminate” against homosexual and bisexual deviants. They try to rationalize this absurd position by saying things like “Exhibitionists offend people.” We point out that tens of millions of Americans and several billion people around the world are offended by homosexual activity, such as public homosexual kissing and hand-holding. We don’t want to depress homosexuals and their supporters, but their position simply makes no sense. They ARE wrong. It is obvious to us and should be obvious to anyone NOT in denial about reality.

            Legal homosexual acts are bad legal and moral precedents. Let us explain in more detail.

            Can we justly discriminate in favor of some unreasonable deviations and against others? No. If we tolerate deviations from reasonable sexual standards, then we will fairly have to tolerate deviations from other reasonable standards because all of the different kinds of deviates will demand consistency from us and nondiscriminatory equal treatment.

            For example, many towns have ordinances restricting what people can do with their homes and yards. These towns want to prevent slums from forming and ruining their environments. Now, what if someone wants to move into a picturesque section of such a town and wants to have a yard of mud with paper littered around it and wants to have a house which has the exterior’s coating of paint badly chipped up? We should tolerate that if we tolerate homosexual acts.

            To those “freedom-loving” liberals who disagree with that last sentence, we can just ask them if they would outlaw any action that lowered someone’s property values. And if they would, we could point out that an openly homosexual person moving into a conservative area would likely lower property values in that area since many conservatives might decide to move out of that area, just like black people moving into certain predominantly white areas can unfortunately and wrongly cause “white flight” and lower property values. Does that mean liberals would agree to outlaw homosexual behavior in that geographic area? Or would they outlaw black people moving into certain white areas of the country? This gives the reader an idea of the kind of legal and moral swamp liberal extremists are wont to create. (Let us remember that trial lawyers, who are big contributors to liberal Democrat politicians, thrive when our laws are confusing and contradictory. Do liberal politicians intentionally create confusing laws which help keep trial lawyers busy as a payback for campaign contributions by those lawyers?)

            And if liberals would not outlaw actions that lower property values, then if they tolerate homosexual deviations they would fairly have to tolerate other deviations (as the aforementioned pig sties). In either case, whether “freedom-loving” liberals would choose to outlaw actions that lower property values or not outlaw, the consequences are very messy for them and their ideology. Once they’ve established the principle that negative deviations from reasonable norms are okay, to selectively apply that principle is discriminatory.

            Incidentally, we should stress that we are NOT arguing that homosexual activity is a heinous crime, just as we would not say stealing a penny is a heinous crime. But just like legalizing the stealing of a penny is an absurd legal precedent (why not then legalize stealing two pennies? a nickel? a dollar? etc.), so legalizing homosexual deviations is an absurd legal precedent.

            Homosexuals like to say, as part of their defense of homosexual acts, that they are not hurting anybody when they engage in such acts (though, because they do tend to be more promiscuous than “normal,” they do spread more sexual diseases per capita than more sexually “normal” people). Well, people who live in an ugly pig sty like the one described above can say the same thing about that pig sty—it doesn’t hurt anybody. That does not carry much weight. Many actions are wrong that do not “hurt” anybody.

            If we tolerate such deviations we will wind up with an ugly, confused, and sick society. Let us learn from the decay and fall of the great Roman and Greek societies, which came to value debauchery. Once people depart from decent moral standards it is frequently all downhill after that because it is harder to be moral than immoral, generally speaking. This is because being moral requires some effort (self-restraint or self-denial), and people tend to take the “path of least resistance.”

            Indeed, over the last 40 years or so, as our society has become more accepting of immoral behavior, our divorce rate has soared, as has the out-of-wedlock birthrate and teen suicide rate, we have seen the rise of an epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases, etc., etc.

            Thus, we should ever try to see to it that morality is the path of least resistance by creating inhibitions to immorality, by at least attaching serious social stigmas to immorality and preferably by illegalizing immoral behavior. (To those who say that we cannot legislate morality, we can reply that outlawing murder, rape, theft, racist behaviors, sexist behaviors, indecent exposure, disturbing the peace, etc., etc., is legislating morality and is obviously proper.)

            Ultimately, all the rules or laws against homosexual activity, normal or deviant sex in public, indecent exposure, obscene literature and videos, the utterance of certain swearwords in public or using them in newspapers and magazines and on TV and radio—all the rules or laws against those things rest on the same basis as the laws or ordinances against the existence of such things as ugly, unkempt houses and yards. What is that basis? Nothing more than this: a large number of people find such things unpleasant or offensive or repugnant, etc., etc.

            It is a matter of maintaining high standards at the least, and at the most of slowly raising those standards as we make society better. Allowing people to lower our standards, to take us down toward a more animalistic state of being, is to allow people to slowly ruin our advanced and advancing society.

            Sure we can survive (after a fashion) if we allow (for examples) public heterosexual or homosexual sexual activity, but what kind of life would that be? Sure we can survive in a muddy, unkempt, littered, ugly neighborhood (as opposed to a grassy, flowered, neat neighborhood), but what kind of life is that?

            The fact is, in a democracy, if enough people find a certain behavior (not orientation or belief) disagreeable they can pass laws against that behavior. And behavior is the key word. Generally speaking, we cannot discriminate on the basis of natural characteristics as race, gender, or age. Generally speaking, we cannot discriminate on the basis of belief or speech. We cannot violate fundamental rights like freedom of speech or religious belief or political belief. But behavior, unpleasant, repugnant, degraded behavior, can be rightly illegalized.

            (We believe it is fairly clear that our Constitution does not even come close to granting a fundamental or inalienable right to aberrant sex like homosexual sex. And having mentioned “race” in the preceding paragraph—homosexuals love to compare their status with the status of racial minorities like black people. The comparison is absurd. Many blacks and other racial minority members are understandably offended when they are compared to people who voluntarily engage in sexually aberrant activity.)

            Homosexuals try to “naturalize” their behavior by saying that such behavior can be found in nature. Even if that is true, homosexual behavior is the exception rather than the rule. Too, nature makes mistakes all the time. There are mutations, genetic defects, etc. There are genes which predispose people to cancer, heart disease, etc., etc. Just because something can be found in nature does not make it good or right. If every person was homosexual the human race would die out because there would be no reproduction. That is just one of the drawbacks to homosexual behavior. Others will be discussed later.

            (There does exist quite a bit of seemingly homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. For examples, in cattle and dogs and monkeys, a male will occasionally “mount” another male as he would mount a female for sex; except there is no sex between the males, the act being an asexual communication of dominance and submission. Also, some sexually deprived animals, e.g., pet dogs, will try to mate with practically anything that moves, like human arms or legs or same-sex animals. But that does not indicate homosexual desire, just orgasm desire.)

            As to whether homosexual desire is natural or instinctual or genetic in some people: in people with some natural physical abnormality in their brains that may be true for them, but it is irrelevant. We all, being imperfect creations, occasionally have immoral desires (as, for examples, to cheat, steal, be violent, etc.). Immoral desires obviously should not be acted upon, whether they are natural or instinctual or in a way man-made. (To go to extremes to clearly illustrate a point—what if some poor guy felt a “natural/instinctual” desire to have sex with a consenting sheep—are we supposed to allow a human-animal sexual relationship? Preposterous, though not so preposterous to a liberal Princeton University philosopher named Peter Singer who rationalized human-animal sex. And what if there is a necrophilia-gene? Having sex with dead people doesn’t “hurt” anyone. How ridiculous and bizarre are we supposed to allow the world to get?)

            “There’s a big difference between engaging in homosexual acts, and engaging in exhibitionist deviations or consenting-adult brother/sister or parent/offspring sexual deviations,” we’ve heard multiple times from homosexuals, as if those differences are very relevant. There is a big difference between stealing five dollars and stealing a million dollars, yet they are both obviously wrong—stealing is stealing. Homosexual deviations are immoral; exhibitionist deviations are immoral; brother/sister and parent/offspring sexual deviations are immoral; all are wrong, differences or no differences.

          • afchief

            Part II

            Also, if homosexuals are going to place much emphasis on such differences, then they ought to start with the most significant of such differences—the differences between man and woman, between heterosexual and homosexual sex. They want to point out the differences that are most “convenient” to them and their rationalizations; but they want to ignore, conveniently, the differences between man and woman. Hypocritical.

            “But it’s love,” homosexuals say. Irrelevant. If you love your parents or your sibling or your baby or your pet dog are you going to have sex with them? Different types of love-objects and different types of love warrant different behaviors. Love doesn’t justify immoral sexual activity.

            And in addition to homosexual partners being negative deviations from the norm and setting bad legal and moral precedents, homosexuals contract certain diseases fairly regularly (details on this point can be found in the section of our website called On The Unhealthy Homosexual Lifestyle). Some of the diseases are hepatitis B, genital herpes, chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, anal cancer, and AIDS. These diseases are nature’s way of telling people that something is wrong with their behavior, that they are abusing or misusing their bodies. These diseases are other good reasons to not engage in homosexual acts.

            Homosexuals point out that many unnatural (i.e., man-invented or artificial) things are valued by human beings—from things like cars and airplanes to complex entertaining actions like contortionist feats to things like purple hair. They rightly say that just because homosexual acts may be unnatural does not necessarily mean they are immoral.

            The response to that is: allowing “unnatural” things like airplanes or physical acts like contortionist feats is fine because they are not bad legal precedents; they are either good legal precedents (e.g., despite occasional accidents airplanes can help a society run much more efficiently) or are essentially neutral legal precedents (e.g., while purple hair is not all that valuable to society, it does not have negative ramifications for society, generally speaking, and one can say the same for contortionist feats). On the other hand, homosexual acts are bad legal precedents because they can lead to social approval of other deviant sex acts. (As noted previously, a misguided Princeton University professor, one Peter Singer, has actually and explicitly defended consenting human-animal sex.) And let us not forget there is a group of homosexuals, the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), organized to push for the legalization of man-boy sex.

            “Who are you to judge others?” we have actually been seriously asked by homosexuals. If we stop judging others we have to legalize murder, rape, theft, etc.—obviously ludicrous things to do. One can feel perfectly free and right to rationally judge others. And if homosexuals do not believe in judging others, then they should not hypocritically judge people like yours truly and tell us we are wrong and “homophobic” for being against homosexual activity.

            Then there is the argument that homosexual acts are effective population-control measures and so are justified. That argument is so bad, so ridiculous it could even be used by pedophiles. Pedophiles can say that if adults were just having sex with 5-year-olds we wouldn’t have a population problem! Hey, murder is an effective population-control measure. So what. Too, any sex act that a man can do with another man and not make anyone pregnant (like oral sex), that man can do with a woman and still not make anyone pregnant. We do not need to go to ridiculous lengths, like homosexual acts (or, to get a little bizarre to make a point, necrophilia or bestiality) to control our population numbers.

            Then there is the “consenting adults” argument: that, generally speaking, anything that happens between consenting adults is fine, including homosexual acts. But first of all, it is obvious that nobody has the right to do wrong, even consenting adults (and homosexual acts are wrong). If two so-called consenting adults choose to rob a bank, we would not legalize bank-robbing.

            Secondly, society has better things to do with its people and resources than treat diseases that homosexuals bring on themselves by consentingly or voluntarily engaging in unsafe and/or physiologically unnatural sex acts. (Resources would be better spent finding cures for diseases people do not bring on themselves, do not “ask” for, as diseases associated with the involuntary aging process. We also could spend that money feeding the starving children of the world. In a very real sense, children are starving because some people, including some heterosexuals, think they have the right to engage in unsafe sex and spread disease. If that doesn’t outrage you you may have lost your humanity. Homosexuals should apologize for all the STDs they’ve spread, and all the money those STDs have cost, and especially for setting bad moral examples for our children.)

            And third, two people engaging in immoral sex acts in absolute privacy is one thing; coming out of the closet with one’s vices and demanding equal rights is quite another and should be frowned upon to say the least. When someone’s behavior becomes public knowledge, when it thereby affects the public, it becomes the public’s business, and the public acquires the right to legislate against that behavior should the public decide logically that it would be advisable to do so.

            Homosexuals like to especially point out that people of the same sex can understand each other better than they can understand the opposite sex, because people of the same sex are naturally more similar to each other.

            There is some truth to that, but when homosexuals conclude from it that homosexual relationships are therefore better and/or more moral than heterosexual ones they go too far. While men and women have their differences, they have many things in common. Let’s build on the things we have in common. Let’s unify the populace, not sexually segregate and disunify it as homosexuals apparently would prefer. Besides, people of the opposite sex can be much more attractive and exciting, naturally.

            By the way, the more lesbians there are in the population, the fewer potential mates for straight men. No red-blooded heterosexual male should want that. And the more male homosexuals there are in the population, the fewer potential mates for straight women. No red-blooded heterosexual female should want that. Plus, from an evolutionary standpoint regarding reproduction, the more homosexuals there are the narrower the available gene pool (due to fewer potential mates), which isn’t good.

            Some critics point out that, in the wide circle of people we at H.O.M.E. know and love and like, there are probably some closet homosexuals. They argue that since we already like them, what difference should their homosexuality make? The fact that this type of “argument” is even being used, like some of the other seriously flawed arguments discussed above, shows how badly our educational system is failing. In the wide circle of people you know and love and like, odds are there are one or two closet racists or sexists or “homophobes” or thieves or pedophiles (etc.). That isn’t much of an argument for anything.

            It should be stressed that numerous homosexuals and bisexuals have a large number of sexual partners, many of whom are essentially perfect strangers. These people just use others for sex and have a difficult time loving. They are contributing to making the world a colder and more exploitative place. (Incidentally, promiscuity says basically this: I do not think you are worth marrying but I’ll use you for sex. Promiscuous sex is actually somewhat of an insult to thinking people. It’s just sexual exploitation.)

            Homosexuals have told straight people that straights must have sexual hang-ups and inhibitions because they do not sexually desire people of their own gender. Well, it is evident that anyone (like a homosexual) who cannot or will not desire/love/marry/enjoy the opposite sex must also have some big hang-ups and inhibitions. Too, since many bisexuals tend to prefer their own sex when it comes to sexual partners, those bisexuals must have the same hang-ups and inhibitions afflicting homosexuals, though to a lesser degree. (If bisexuals fully enjoyed the opposite gender sexually, they wouldn’t waste their time on same-sex partners. Something, some sexual inhibitions and hang-ups, must be interfering with bisexuals’ enjoyment of the opposite sex.)

            Also, as a review of the numerous studies done through the years on homosexuals bears out, it is a fact that many many homosexuals were sexually abused when young (for more info on this fact see the section of our website called Sexual Abuse: A Major Cause Of Homosexuality?). That abuse is what has so disoriented the sexual desires of many homosexuals. In other words, many homosexuals were not born homosexual and so can choose to be what they were born to be—heterosexual. Such a choice may not be easy and may require therapy, but for many disoriented people it is a viable option. And for these people to choose to remain homosexual just lets the degenerates who abused them have too much power over them—the power to determine their sexual orientations.

            Modern psychology knows that people can be conditioned to be practically anything. The environments we grow up in can make us tyrannical or meek, generous or selfish, loving or hateful, etc., etc. Human beings seem to be almost infinitely malleable—capable of becoming pedophiles, necrophiliacs, torturers, whatever. Identical twins can grow up to be very different people, with one even being heterosexual and the other homosexual. Homosexuals are not trapped in their homosexuality any more than identical twins are trapped in their sexuality by their genes. Homosexuals should be able to become enjoyably heterosexual if they concentrate and “train” themselves to. They cannot justify not doing so. Let’s go forward, not back thousands of years to the ancient Greek and Roman debauched societies. Let’s progress not regress. Homosexuals should not be afraid of change, should not be afraid of becoming heterosexual.

            Males are attracted to females by chemical substances (pheromones), just like dogs in heat, and are attracted by flirtatious behavior and perhaps by physical traits like breasts. This is how nature works. Even lower animals flirt. This natural “programming” is why normal men are attracted to women and vice versa.

            Being what we are, i.e., fulfilling our natures, within reason, makes us happiest. Being heterosexual is within reason, engaging in homosexual activity is not within reason. That is just the way it is. Just like we should not eat poison ivy or bask in the sun to excess (getting sunstroke and/or severe sunburn) or lay naked in the snow too long (getting hypothermia). That is just the way it is. Our natures entail limits.

            It would be wrong for society to allow homosexuals to impose their “morality,” their be-tolerant-of-aberrant-sexualities “morality,” on us. It would be wrong for us to allow homosexuals to dictate to us what we will and will not tolerate. It would be wrong for us to yield to their unreasonable demands for toleration and legalization of homosexual acts. Like it or not, that is reality. That is just the way it is. Most people can easily accept that. If homosexuals do not want to appear irrational or prejudiced they also ought to accept that.

            Indeed, any honest and logical homosexual has to admit that the decisive argument against homosexual acts, the argument that legal homosexual activity is a bad legal and moral precedent, is a perfectly valid argument. This is because homosexuals and their liberal supporters use the same type of argument to try to defend their values. Liberals like to ask those who want to censor some book or some smutty rock and roll lyrics: “Where will the censorship stop? What’s next on your list?”

            If homosexuals and their supporters recognize the validity of the bad-legal-precedent argument, the “slippery slope” argument, and they do, then they have to admit that such an argument helps demonstrate that homosexual acts are immoral and illegalizeable.

            Also, as noted previously, for decades the American Psychiatric Association considered homosexuality a disorder (until it was taken over by pro-homosexual ideologues who are now letting sexual politics trump science and logic). In the section of our website titled “Is Homosexuality A Disorder?” we make the case that it is, though we view it as a comparatively minor one. (And, again, we are all born imperfect.) Still, it makes no sense to treat a disorder as if it were not a disorder.

            On another matter, those adults who mislead young sexually confused people into thinking homosexual activity is okay are just instilling a false hope. They are taking advantage of the young and confused. They are doing a disservice to everyone, and they are heartlessly setting young homosexuals up for a big fall. When young homosexuals debate conservative intellectuals and find out they cannot justify homosexual activity, when young homosexuals find out all their arguments are flawed, they can become seriously depressed. We should not be instilling the false hope—we should not be fooling young people into believing—that homosexual activity is okay when thinking people have known for centuries it is not.

            The biggest reason that the so-called “gay rights” (sad wrongs) movement has gotten as far as it has is that the major media, which for decades have been dominated by pro-homosexual liberals, have conducted a massive, sophisticated propaganda campaign in favor of homosexuality. They have willfully disseminated exaggerations and falsehoods, plus have engaged in widespread censorship of inconvenient facts concerning homosexuality.

            We wish more Americans knew just how much their values and emotions have been insidiously manipulated by media “malpractitioners.” Someday in the future people are going to look back at this era and wonder how so many pro-homosexual people let themselves be taken in by fallacious propaganda.

            (For those who want to know more about media manipulation—and about all the in-depth psychological research done on people with the goal of learning how to push our buttons, how to get us to respond in certain ways to various stimuli—a good and important read is the classic book Hidden Persuaders by Vance Packard.)

            Before we close this section, some words on the mean-spirited use of the term “homophobic” by those who love to call people like this writer pejorative and inflammatory names. Homophobia doesn’t really exist. Are people who are morally opposed to theft or rape or whatever, theftphobes, or rapephobes, or whateverphobes? Obviously not. Principled opposition to homosexual activity is clearly not a phobia, is clearly not a pathological fear. People who label others “homophobic” are just revealing their ignorance and naivety.

            To conclude: penalizing people for engaging in homosexual behavior is clearly not discrimination, just like penalizing people for exhibitionism or incest is not discrimination. Penalizing people for immoral or illegal behavior is simply the right thing to do. That is a truth homosexuals (and bisexuals) should be able to understand. And with all the genuinely serious problems in the world that need our attention, don’t homosexuals and their supporters have anything better to do with their time than struggle to legalize immoral sexual activity? These extremists should get a life.

          • NGN

            poor oppressed chef…..awwwwwww

          • rightfighter

            He Doth Protest Too Much…

          • NGN

            more plagiarism from chef eh??? means absolutely zero cheffy….keep the rants going as they are sweet music to my ears

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So you would push your son to be someone he is not, hetero? Christians always claim that homosexuals are brainwashing someone to be homosexual. So you would do the same to your kid? Got it.

          • NGN

            opinions of minds greater than yours vary on this subject……I’ll take their word over yours

          • afchief

            The greatest mind of all…..God says homosexuality is sin!!! Why are you and other homosexuals on Christian websites? To change our minds? It will NEVER happen. We KNOW what the Word of God says about homosexuality. We KNOW it is sin.

            You and other homosexuals are blinded by sin. You cannot see the truth because “the god of the word (satan) has blinded your mind”. 2 Corinthians 4:4

            It is quite evident!!!

          • NGN

            cant be blinded by that which doesn’t exist chef. you might as well quote Dr Seuss

          • NGN

            not a homosexual but if you’re looking, I know a few single guys…LOL!

          • rightfighter

            Ever read the two homosexual relationships IN your Bible? They’ve been there for centuries.

          • Barry Boucher

            Very narrow minded people. Jesus was more concerned about loving your neighbors and your enemies. Not condemning them, listen to the real gospel sinner and put down your stone, less God judges and condemns you by your own righteousness.

          • afchief

            I never said I don’t love homosexuals, because I do. If I and other Christians do not warn them that their lifestyle has eternal consequences then we will have to stand before God and answer as to why we did not warn them.

            Why do you think homosexuals come to Christian websites? They are searching for truth.

          • NGN

            not at all sweetie. they come here to state their side. xtians have a long history of lying on these forums…yourself included….

          • Josey

            The good book says those who don’t believe are condemned already.
            John 3:16-21 vs16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
            20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

          • rightfighter

            Thank God I’m Jewish and don’t live next to this bigot. THIS is “Christianity”?

          • Barry Boucher

            Yep,he’s now going to tell you that you’re going to hell too. That’s why I hesitate to call myself a Christian. People like this destroy the religion.

          • rightfighter

            My mother was a Christian and when I would attend church sometimes it was a sermon of hatred. Never said anything to her, but it made me realize how much I love being Jewish.
            So yes, their are Good Christians, but it’s hard to find them these days.

        • NGN

          Now the definition is far more inclusive!

          • afchief

            Since God will NEVER recognize homo marriage, we Christians will never recognize homo marriage. NEVER!!!!

            Besides, there is NO law saying homos can marry except in 3 states!!!

          • NGN

            your right but the ones saying that they cant marry have been found unconstitutional by SCOTUS

          • afchief

            Then show me the law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • NGN

            scotus has ruled. you lost. quit whining..

          • afchief

            Ohhhhh show me the law, yes show me the law, ohhh show me the law todayyyy.

            What? Congress did not amend the Constitution. Ohhh there is no law, yes there is no law, ohhh there is no law for homos to marry.

            So sad!!!

          • NGN

            since your holy man only exists in your mind, I could care less if it blesses anything. my marriage had no gods in attendance and we’ve been happily married 16yrs.

        • Josey

          Homosexuals want us to say that what they are doing is ok, can’t do it because of my faith in Christ and what the Good Book says about it no more than I can condone fornication, adultery, idolatry, etc. Souls are at stake that Jesus bled and died for.

          • afchief

            True! We Christians know that homosexuality is sin. We know that homos are blind to their sin. We know that God has given them over to a reprobate mind. And we know the only way to escape this sin is through Jesus Christ.

            The majority of homos come to Christian websites looking for truth. Looking for affirmation of their lifestyle. They know deep down that it is wrong. That is why God said “they are without excuse”. They KNOW better!!!!

      • Barry Boucher

        Then apply at a public school or other secular position. Leave the religious organizations alone

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Maybe the person applying is religuous. Oh wait what am I thinking, homosexuals can’t be religious.

          • Barry Boucher

            Maybe it wouldn’t make him any different than any other Christian sinning every day. I’m a lot more open minded than you think much more than Alchief

          • Josey

            And yes Christians sin and are far from perfect but repent and are allowing Christ to finish the work He began in them at the new birth, a work being done daily, we all sin and fall short but that’s no excuse to take God’s grace for granted and I guarantee they are not sinning in regards to a lifestyle of homosexuality, fornication, etc. or they cannot claim to be following Christ which is what being a Christian is about. There is no such things as a homosexual christian, fornicating christian, again etc… Once born again and anew, a Christian no longer desires that old life style, not saying they won’t have temptations to fight with the power and might of God. I would have to question my salvation in Christ if I willfully disobeyed His word by remaining in a sinful lifestyle of the above mentioned things.

          • Barry Boucher

            Every time you repeat a sin it’s your will but I know it’s a lot easier to blame the devil. Wise up! You know God can and will be the only judge. If no one is attacking you or putting you in danger or condemnation then go on your way confessing your sins to God and getting to know him which will cause you to grow inchrist, believe me you will never get to a point where you can have enough time to judge others.

  • Becky

    He should take his little application and his “husband” as his emergency contact and apply at a muslim owned business. Ha! These people go after easy targets, at least non-lethal ones.

    • mantis

      you don’t know many Muslims do you? you can always tell because only the people who have never met a Muslim think they are all violent psychopaths

  • Reason And Believing

    This will be thrown out on appeal President Trump will unpack the Federal Courts , He’s hinted to it in relation to question about reversing the homosexual marriage ruling

  • Barry Boucher

    We really need a conservative like Cruz to bring back our constitutional rights.

    • Ambulance Chaser

      What constitutional right have you lost?

      • Barry Boucher

        Freedom of religion and not to mention it’s a private institution. And do you really think the Christian faith is ever going to condone homosexuality. Come on! Do you want the government making all you’re decisions for you, we’re not sheep but free people whose independent beliefs should not be infringed upon. Why would these homosexuals want to work at a place that opposes their position unless they have an agenda. I’m not against homosexuality as I take a more scientific approach. You are who you are, it’s not a sinful choice as some believe, but don’t try to force your beliefs against any religious organization. Or you risk the same judgement as those who try to make their beliefs of morality a judicial law.

        • afchief

          You are a liar!!!

          • MamaBear

            afchief
            At least he is reasonable enough to not want homosexuality acceptance forced on Christians. Some of them and their supporters are so radical, like the man in the article, the judge, and certain commenters here, that they are willing to ditch the First Amendment and freedom of religion for the sake of imposing their homosexual agenda.

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          What about his freedom of religion? Maybe he is Christian and is that the reason he applied there for a job. It’s his right to apply for any job he wants regardless in which place. Or do his rights stop when he applies for a job in any religion institution?

          • Barry Boucher

            Yep that’s were it ends

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            And you say you are more open minded? Right.

      • Josey

        how about the right to hold a public office and live your faith 24/7? That sums it all up, when one gives their heart to Christ they are born anew and it’s not a water facet that one turns on and off and they should not be forced to do what is against their faith or leave the job, we need godly men and women in those positions.

        • Ambulance Chaser

          You don’t have that right. You never had that right. Jehovah’s Witnesses can’t become doctors but refuse to perform blood transfusions. Scientologists can’t become psychologists but refuse to see patients. Buddhists can’t go to work in a slaughterhouse but refuse to slaughterer any animals.

          Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does require that employers give reasonable accommodation to employees, but “allowing someone to refuse to serve people who have a right to be served” does not qualify.

  • acontraryview

    “Massachusetts Court Rules Religious School Must Hire Homosexuals for Non-Teaching Positions”

    No, that is not what the court ruled. The court ruled that this school may not refuse to hire a candidate for a non-teaching job based solely on sexuality.

  • Donnie Newell

    our society really can’t function with homosexuality vs Christianity getting in the way all the time. in fact our society can’t function without christianty as the moral guide . our government has to have a code of beliefs to live by. we’re just gonna implode from within. “a house divided against itself shall not stand”.

  • FoJC_Forever

    Homosexuality is a product of Feminism. It grows right alongside this movement which exalts women over men, rather than men and women being equal in God’s eyes. While it is distressing to watch these movements dominate and crush freedom and morality, it is merely another sign of the End Times. The world is being prepared to receive the Antichrist.

    Rejoice, for the Time is near that the Work of Salvation will be complete and the New Heavens and New Earth will established by the Power of God! The followers of Jesus (the) Christ will shed our mortal bonds and be received into Everlasting Glory with the Eternal Word and Son of God. We shall all be changed into the glorious image of our Savior and live forever in His Presence!

    Follow Jesus, find Peace.

    • mantis

      homosexuality has existed for thousands of years

      • FoJC_Forever

        mantis is a troll

        • mantis

          telling the truth doesn’t make me a troll

    • mantis

      god never said that man and women are equal, the bible is full of verses that say women must be subservient to men

      • MamaBear

        There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
        Galatians 3:28

        • mantis

          and? the bible still say that women must obey men

          • MamaBear

            Not men in general, but their own husbands. But, husbands must love their wives sacrificially like Christ loved the church. No man with that kind of love is going to abuse, boss around, or refuse to listen to his wife.
            Also Ephesians 5:21 and I Corinthians 7:2-3 teach mutual submission in marriage.
            Proverbs 31 is one of the most uplifting passages about women in the whole history of literature.

          • mantis

            no it’s all vile sexist garbage

          • latinovet

            Mama Bear,
            Wives are direct extensions of God’s love for husbands.
            My wife is my life, my love, and my everything.
            She is the air in my lungs, the beating of my heart, and the love in my eyes.
            I have literally kissed the ground she walks on.
            I am NOTHING without her!

          • Jed

            “When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her. The higher her virtue, the more noble her character, the more devoted she is to truth, justice, goodness, the more a man has to aspire to be worthy of her. The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women.” ~ Fulton J. Sheen, Life Is Worth Living

          • rightfighter

            What does the Bible say about women on a message board?

        • rightfighter

          Actually “Jesus” is a myth that when badly translated from Jewish Scrolls, 40 men couldn’t figure it out. And you’ve been swallowing these lies for centuries.

          • MamaBear

            Take your lies and your mythology elsewhere. Jesus is real and He will come again.

          • rightfighter

            God is Jewish. Thus why Jews are “The Chosen Ones”. Think about that hard…

    • Jolanda Tiellemans

      I’m pretty sure homosexuality existed way before feminism. In the old days women had no rights, were less then men, hence feminism didn’t even existed back then. As far as I know my history, homosexuality existed in ancient Rome.

      • Josey

        he didn’t say anything about sodomy not existing beforehand but said it is a product of feminism and is being pushed harder now than ever which always brings judgement just like Sodom and Gomorrah and who can say if it feminism wasn’t being pushed in those two cursed places either. They have been doing their best to make boys look more feminine in commercials, as models in magazines, men are now taught that to be hairless is the thing, shave it all off, wax their eyebrows, etc. Girls are being taught to look like boys as well.
        Schools now are teaching young ones no genders at all, calling each other little purple penguins or whatever except what they are little boys and little girls so as not to offend the little ones which is not for the children anyway cause it’s their parents who have perverted thinking that are offended, young ones don’t care and can’t understand enough to even be offended by being called by their correct gender they were born with unless their parents push those thoughts into their heads, brain wash them and confuse them. Little children are innocent and pure but they get brainwashed by their homosexual or just sick parents. When a four year old out of curiosity asks “am I a boy or girl?” it’s the parents responsibility to tell them what they are and little ones are satisfied with the simple truth. You don’t ask them what would you like to be, they have no idea at those young ages but this is what homosexual couples do to these kids, confusing and brainwashing them. A few high profile celebs are leading the example in this brainwashing and confusion and claim it is acceptance they are showing their child when it is just sickness, not selfless love.
        I’ve even seen where a heterosexual couple who had all boys and wanted a girl so badly that they ended up convincing the last boy that he is a girl trapped in a boys body so the mother dressed him as a girl, she obviously has mental issues to do such a thing, I’m sure that is happening more and more today, my opinion as to why we are seeing more transgenders at young ages.
        The same could be said of a family that has all girls but wants a boy badly so they dress her up as a boy.

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          I think when a man wants to look more feminine it’s there choice. When a girl wants to look more like a boy, it’s therev choice, I know it was mine, was a tomboy growing up. Oh you mean like christians are brainwashing their homosexual kid that it is wrong to be like that? And don’t say it isn’t happening cause it is. Transgender has nothing to do with parents pushing their kids to be something they are not. This is what homosexual do to their kids roflmao. Proof please,cause that is just a load of crap. I have seen many kids of homosexual parents growing up being normal teens, falling in love, get married and start their own family. Oh and kids from homosexual becoming homosexual too is just a myth. But hey you don’t have to take my word, just try talking to people raised by homosexuals.

          • Josey

            Apparently it wasn’t their choice for the were born either a boy or a girl with either a penis or vagina, God chose their sex for them and it’s nothing but rebellion against God’s choice for them to choose something they are physically not. You are living a rebellious life, repent and be set free by Christ or be judged and cast off, that is your only choice. You either serve God or satan and I can tell you that God offers true freedom through Christ to live a godly and righteous life and satan who hates you because God created us and loves us torments those who have given their lives over to be his slaves and a slave you are to him whether you see it or not and when he is done with you you’ll find yourself living in eternal damnation with him when God judges at the time designated. You choose to lie to yourself daily about your gender and others.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            I have freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom to think what I want, freedom to vote or not to vote, freedom to mary or stay single. You don’t read very well do you? I was a tomboy growing up, that is something else as being transgender. And for your information I don’t follow anyone, I’m not a sheep, I’m my own person.

      • FoJC_Forever

        Feminism is empowered by Satan, who successfully tempted the first woman to ignore God’s Word for pleasure and knowledge. The demons empowering Feminism are using women, just like their master used women in the beginning. Cling to your ideals, if you must, but you will only inherit Eternal Damnation, right along with the demons who though they could overcome God.

        Women have not been historically oppressed. This is just another lie told to women to incite them to rebellion against God. many people, of all races and both genders have been and are being oppressed. Feminism doesn’t promote equality, it simply turns the tables to redirect oppression. This trait is indicative to women – it is in the fallen nature of women to overcome men, to “make them pay”.

        Feminism has been around since the Fall of Mankind from the glory He originally created.

        • Jolanda Tiellemans

          Roflmao! Oh man, can we say conspiracy theory. You really think I take this serious?

          • FoJC_Forever

            You can say “conspiracy theory” all you want, I will continue to say the Truth.

            Your life is a theory, based on false premises and lies.

            Judgement is coming.

          • FoJC_Forever

            Oh, and the condescending sarcasm doesn’t work on me. You live in shame and that shame will consume you.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            What shame? Being single? I had no idea that was something to be ashamed of. Oh my, need to change that then I guess.

          • FoJC_Forever

            The shame of your unforgiven Sin.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            So, being single is a sin? Or is it the hot sex I had in the past with my boyfriend(s)?

          • FoJC_Forever

            You have committed many sins, which stem from the Sin which is in the fallen human nature.

  • Josey

    It’s interesting that Adam was created by God and woman was created by God from a rib taken from Adam. God made man the stronger of the two sexes, man is to be women’s protector and provider and a provider for the family, he is to love his wife as Christ loves the church, to guide his family in the ways of God. That doesn’t mean God sees women as inferior to men, but just differently. Women have a different role than man and directive from God. Feminism is rebellion against God in all it’s forms. I am happy to be a woman and I submit to God’s way of man being the head of household if he follows God’s ways of doing things. Is the way God meant it to be, satan deceived Eve but not Adam which caused the fall but through Christ all things are restored.

    • Barry Boucher

      Just wondering how many adams were created and how many Eve’s. Also have a problem believing Abraham was so drunk he didn’t know he was banging his daughters, if so how did he get an errection and have an orgasm. I believe God called him righteous, but how can it be accepted by the Christian faith.not to mention he was drunk wasted.

      • Josey

        I think you’ve got your bible stories mixed up! Abraham did no such thing. You certainly didn’t read that in the bible about Abraham.

      • Mellow Fellow

        God called Lot righteous, and yes he had sex with his daughters. I have to assume that he came twice, as both daughters wanted to bear a child.

        The bible never explains the why’s or how’s of a city full of people right next to the spot where Eve had her two boys. Reminds me of the ending of the movie The Village.

    • rightfighter

      Actually Eve was created from a bone in Adam pen!s. And Adam asked God for a “companion” not a woman…Too bad the 40 men that made up the “Bible” couldn’t translate Hebrew and Greek correctly.