|
Post by mouse on Jul 31, 2010 14:39:03 GMT
neither have i...but perhaps its an opinion..... ;D and we all know opinion can be damned dangerous especially to those not toeing the party line
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 31, 2010 14:42:15 GMT
she is a student and not yet a proffesional....not yet in work..just sudying so she hasnt been judged on her proffesionaism only on her veiws and we probably will never know the out come...then again we may
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 14:48:31 GMT
Pages back Riot Grrl posted what this woman said and why she is unable to complete her course. In short that she would not work with homosexuals unless she could 'convert them' and she would not affirm their behaviour.
The job of a counsellor is to be non judgemental. This woman is very judgemental and she is judging people against her religious beliefs.
Fine to do so in private but she wants to do so in public.
That's it and all about it.
Also there seems to be a lot of tension around the word bigot. FYI it was Anna who used it
"Any "gay", who feels threatened by her religious views is truly insecure or bigoted and should admit it!"
Also there was a comment back about having the right to voice your beliefs and not be called a bigot - what utter tripe. There exists no right whatsoever and quite right too!
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 14:52:07 GMT
she is a student and not yet a proffesional....not yet in work..just sudying so she hasnt been judged on her proffesionaism only on her veiws and we probably will never know the out come...then again we may she hasn't been judged on her views at all she's refusing to complete part of the course. if she doesn't complete she wont pass - simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 14:56:24 GMT
This is what RV said
Anna, can you please explain why you appear unable to grasp this simple concept: This woman was sacked, not because of her beliefs, but because of her actions? She hates homosexuals and will not treat them fairly in accordance with her job description? She cannot function in the job she is training for and so she is out of here.
He never said all women hate homosexuals.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 31, 2010 15:10:15 GMT
Random Voice, someone could still serve in a bar even though he believes women should not drink; he could smile and hand over the G and T with a merry quip and no-one would be the wiser. These people could, possibly, do something similar; it seems they have chosen not to. I suspect their views are not unusual; I've already mentioned that I knew a Sikh who expressed much the same. The difference, I suppose, is that he was planning to become a lawyer, where one's own beliefs very much take second place to how one can manipulate the rules to serve your client. Neither am I so certain as you that the women here "hate" homsexuals. I've seen nothing here that suggests that. I'm baffled that you should think us girls all hate gays. For a start, I can think of at least one woman member who IS gay and I also had lesbian relations when I was young. Where do you get that weird idea from? Dearest Lin! I think only RV is claiming with God like allknowingness that Mrs. Ward, Mrs. Keeton or anyone for that matters here hates homosexuals!
There are posts going up where the facts are simply ignored! Mrs. Ward said very clearly on the YouTube video i posted that she's very willing to counsel gays, but she wishes to be truthful and not have to claim she approves of homosexuality. I'm sure the same is true for Mrs. Keeton.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2010 15:13:36 GMT
Random Voice, someone could still serve in a bar even though he believes women should not drink; he could smile and hand over the G and T with a merry quip and no-one would be the wiser. These people could, possibly, do something similar; it seems they have chosen not to. I suspect their views are not unusual; I've already mentioned that I knew a Sikh who expressed much the same. The difference, I suppose, is that he was planning to become a lawyer, where one's own beliefs very much take second place to how one can manipulate the rules to serve your client. Neither am I so certain as you that the women here "hate" homsexuals. I've seen nothing here that suggests that. I'm baffled that you should think us girls all hate gays. For a start, I can think of at least one woman member who IS gay and I also had lesbian relations when I was young. Where do you get that weird idea from? Oh Lin, I didn't mean the women on this board! When I said "the women here" I meant the women who are the subject of the thread, who some people have described as hating gays!
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 15:27:03 GMT
I'm baffled that you should think us girls all hate gays. For a start, I can think of at least one woman member who IS gay and I also had lesbian relations when I was young. Where do you get that weird idea from? Dearest Lin! I think only RV is claiming with God like allknowingness that Mrs. Ward, Mrs. Keeton or anyone for that matters here hates homosexuals!
There are posts going up where the facts are simply ignored! Mrs. Ward said very clearly on the YouTube video i posted that she's very willing to counsel gays, but she wishes to be truthful and not have to claim she approves of homosexuality. I'm sure the same is true for Mrs. Keeton. so not fact at all? ;D
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 31, 2010 15:35:11 GMT
Anna says: " Nothing has shown me that these two students can't follow ethical guidelines." And that is the interesting bit in my opinion, beause neither have either of them even tried to show that they can, so far as I can tell! Julea Ward on her video she came across as a mature and thoughtful person, but she indicated that attempts on the part of her and the college to work out a solution failed. Like you, Anna, I don't believe either are "gay haters" as has been alleged, but I can also see why their view of homosexuality could be very damaging, were they to put it into practice. Including ( if I may say so), damaging to people like yourself, given what you have told us. Incidentally, I did take the point that you were only relaying your experiences of school counselling. In my day I believe careers advice was carried out by the cookery mistress in the lunch break...how times have changed! Dearest Skylark! The 2 women to whom this thread is dedicated to show no hatred towards homosexuals and are willing to counsel them! They simply don't wish to have to lie and claim they approve of homosexuality. I see absolutely no problem with them completing their counseling education and i appreciate their honesty!
I myself could quickly enter into a Lesbian relationship again, if i met someone who was somewhat my type and obviously homosexual, like me-although i don't reject guys! I feel in my heart that it would be for me very bad and very wrong to get into a pride trip and deny my feelings. I do feel it's also very wrong to try to seduce someone into homosexuality, if that's not in that person's heart.
I really have no problem with other Christians not approving of that part of me!
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 15:42:58 GMT
Anna says: " Nothing has shown me that these two students can't follow ethical guidelines." And that is the interesting bit in my opinion, beause neither have either of them even tried to show that they can, so far as I can tell! Julea Ward on her video she came across as a mature and thoughtful person, but she indicated that attempts on the part of her and the college to work out a solution failed. Like you, Anna, I don't believe either are "gay haters" as has been alleged, but I can also see why their view of homosexuality could be very damaging, were they to put it into practice. Including ( if I may say so), damaging to people like yourself, given what you have told us. Incidentally, I did take the point that you were only relaying your experiences of school counselling. In my day I believe careers advice was carried out by the cookery mistress in the lunch break...how times have changed! Dearest Skylark! The 2 women to whom this thread is dedicated to show no hatred towards homosexuals and are willing to counsel them! They simply don't wish to have to lie and claim they approve of homosexuality. I see absolutely no problem with them completely their counseling education and i appreciate their honesty!
That's not the case at all with Keeton. She has refused to take part in some additional training that the University insisted she needed. She refused and sued instead. So who she is willing to counsel is not the point - she's refusing to complete the course as instructed by her tutors.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 31, 2010 15:45:59 GMT
and equally there exists no right to call people bigots...it is afterall on an opinon that some one is a bigot and the criteria alters all the time from place to place and from society to society and the time within that society but i agree there is no RIGHT not to be called a bigot ......any more than there is a RIGHT to call some one a bigot in fact there are no such thing as rights.....for what we can and cannot do is all dependent on other factors and there fore not a right....there are of course obligations and agreements..but tis a different matter entirely oh what a tangle it all becomes ;D when its all about preception and opinion
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 15:51:48 GMT
and equally there exists no right to call people bigots...it is afterall on an opinon that some one is a bigot and the criteria alters all the time from place to place and from society to society and the time within that society but i agree there is no RIGHT not to be called a bigot ......any more than there is a RIGHT to call some one a bigot in fact there are no such thing as rights.....for what we can and cannot do is all dependent on other factors and there fore not a right....there are of course obligations and agreements..but tis a different matter entirely oh what a tangle it all becomes ;D when its all about preception and opinion Freedom of speech is a right. But I am confused with what you are saying. That people are not allowed to express their opinions? Are you really meaning we had no right to call Hitler evil, because he was acting on his beliefs? What are you on about Mouse
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 31, 2010 16:15:28 GMT
and equally there exists no right to call people bigots...it is afterall on an opinon that some one is a bigot and the criteria alters all the time from place to place and from society to society and the time within that society but i agree there is no RIGHT not to be called a bigot ......any more than there is a RIGHT to call some one a bigot in fact there are no such thing as rights.....for what we can and cannot do is all dependent on other factors and there fore not a right....there are of course obligations and agreements..but tis a different matter entirely oh what a tangle it all becomes ;D when its all about preception and opinion Freedom of speech is a right. But I am confused with what you are saying. That people are not allowed to express their opinions? Are you really meaning we had no right to call Hitler evil, because he was acting on his beliefs? What are you on about Mouse i am saying that we really have no rights what ever.. we have arrangements..obligations and agreements...but no actual RIGHTS i am say that people have a right to express their views/opinions but that the very people who call views bigotted are them selves showing bigottry in name calling against those who views they do not agree with we had every REASON to call hitler evil judging his words and actions..the word bigot i dont think was ever applicable to him but we had no RIGHTS to call him evil for had we been in germany..france,,norway the RIGHT to call hitler anything but the fuher was taken away...what we had was the freedom not a right
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 16:30:51 GMT
Freedom of speech is a right. But I am confused with what you are saying. That people are not allowed to express their opinions? Are you really meaning we had no right to call Hitler evil, because he was acting on his beliefs? What are you on about Mouse i am saying that we really have no rights what ever.. we have arrangements..obligations and agreements...but no actual RIGHTS i am say that people have a right to express their views/opinions but that the very people who call views bigotted are them selves showing bigottry in name calling against those who views they do not agree with we had every REASON to call hitler evil judging his words and actions..the word bigot i dont think was ever applicable to him but we had no RIGHTS to call him evil for had we been in germany..france,,norway the RIGHT to call hitler anything but the fuher was taken away...what we had was the freedom not a right I see - you are agreeing with me and decrying your own post - jolly good ;D
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jul 31, 2010 16:43:51 GMT
I don't hate homophobic bigots. I just disapprove of them and their lifestyles, and, should I come face-to-face with one, I would consider it my duty to tell him/her exactly why I disapproved of them and thought they were morally wrong. If I was asked to counsel or support a homophobic bigot I would suggest they got themselves treated and tried to cure themselves of it.
So, no problem with that then I take it?
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 31, 2010 17:21:22 GMT
i am saying that we really have no rights what ever.. we have arrangements..obligations and agreements...but no actual RIGHTS i am say that people have a right to express their views/opinions but that the very people who call views bigotted are them selves showing bigottry in name calling against those who views they do not agree with we had every REASON to call hitler evil judging his words and actions..the word bigot i dont think was ever applicable to him but we had no RIGHTS to call him evil for had we been in germany..france,,norway the RIGHT to call hitler anything but the fuher was taken away...what we had was the freedom not a right I see - you are agreeing with me and decrying your own post - jolly good ;D what ever
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 17:35:46 GMT
You are flip flopping all over the place - Do you agree with this?
Also there was a comment back about having the right to voice your beliefs and not be called a bigot - what utter tripe. There exists no right whatsoever and quite right too!
or this?
people have a right to hold an opinion....for or against what ever.... without being called bigots by those bigotted against those who do not toe the line on the acepted thinking
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 31, 2010 17:37:13 GMT
I don't hate homophobic bigots. I just disapprove of them and their lifestyles, and, should I come face-to-face with one, I would consider it my duty to tell him/her exactly why I disapproved of them and thought they were morally wrong. If I was asked to counsel or support a homophobic bigot I would suggest they got themselves treated and tried to cure themselves of it. So, no problem with that then I take it? you can aprove or disaprove as and how you feel fit... but you really ought to extend the same freedom to others without asumming that they base their view on nothing more than bigotry any more than they can assume you to be bigoted against them but no i have no problem what ever with your opinion...why should i have it is ONLY afterall YOUR opinion freedom of thought like freedom of expression and speech has to be available to all..other wise it isnt freedom at all telling them why you thought them to be morally wrong and why you disaprove of their opinion is a totally different matter and the real way to go..rather than a blank condemation via the word bigot...for no doubt the more intelligent would like you.. have come to their opinion via a thought process rather than a knee jerk reaction and there are those who while disaproving of homosexuality are not going to be hateful to those who practise it..we can all disagree with some thing and yet live alongside in peace and harmony. and were you asked to council a homophobe i am sure you would be much more proffesional than to call them a bigot.....or sujest they got them selves treated......because as we know it doesnt work and isnt as simple as that...if only it were..then we would all be happier
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 31, 2010 17:44:55 GMT
You are flip flopping all over the place - Do you agree with this? Also there was a comment back about having the right to voice your beliefs and not be called a bigot - what utter tripe. There exists no right whatsoever and quite right too! or this? people have a right to hold an opinion....for or against what ever.... without being called bigots by those bigotted against those who do not toe the line on the acepted thinkingi know my bad bad bad naughty its the word RIGHT that i feel is being used in the wrong context...seem to be confuing right with right ie to walk along a path which one owns and ie right as in a right which can be taken away by society/politics/social constraints and the word bigot....very overused these days
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 31, 2010 17:53:45 GMT
You are flip flopping all over the place - Do you agree with this? Also there was a comment back about having the right to voice your beliefs and not be called a bigot - what utter tripe. There exists no right whatsoever and quite right too! or this? people have a right to hold an opinion....for or against what ever.... without being called bigots by those bigotted against those who do not toe the line on the acepted thinkingi know my bad bad bad naughty its the word RIGHT that i feel is being used in the wrong context...seem to be confuing right with right ie to walk along a path which one owns and ie right as in a right which can be taken away by society/politics/social constraints and the word bigot....very overused these days I'm sure Anna will take your point on board
|
|