Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
University suspends administator over view of homosexuality
worldnetdaily.com — Associate Vice President of Human Resources Crystal Dixon wrote in response to a newspaper editor's column criticizing a lack of equality for homosexuals that, "I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are 'civil rights victims.' Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a black woman.'"
thijoh- 43 diggs
- digg it
- pilgrim2497, on 05/05/2008, -9/+19Who took the word perversion out of the dictionary, and how did they get away with it?
- DOGODSWILL, on 05/06/2008, -10/+8The LIBERALS , and they won't in the next life.
- booklover43, on 05/05/2008, -9/+16Mrs. Dixon is a smart woman. Let's vote for her for president.
- DOGODSWILL, on 05/06/2008, -10/+7She is a woman that stands on the truth and GOGLY WISDOM . The ones that would not want her in an office ( that could rule aganist their agenda) , to destroy AMERICA with their SINS ,are the same ones that are having her fired now.
- groovsmyth, on 05/06/2008, -4/+3Hold that thought. Now, how about voting for someone very much like her who has promised to be available on the ballot come November... ALAN KEYES! http://www.alankeyes.com AND/OR http://renewamerica.us
- ThoughtfulWi, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Say, how is Alan getting along with his lesbian daughter, Maya these days? Have you heard?
- levibo, on 05/05/2008, -10/+21Here's another example of how the homosexual agenda is not just to be tolerated and accepted, but to have ANY and ALL speech that disagrees with their views silenced and banned. Get ready for Bible scripture to be branded "hate speech."
- DOGODSWILL, on 05/06/2008, -11/+4AMEN , and it is bringing on the PAPTURE to seperate the TRUTH from the LIES, SAVED from the LOST, LIGHT from DARKNESS ,RIGHTOUSNESS from the UNRIGHTOUSNESS ,and ETC.
- MrDuke77, on 05/05/2008, -9/+21Talk about chilling free speech. She stated a fact, that being black or being handicapped is NOT a choice one makes. Homosexuality IS a choice. If you have definitive PROOF to the contrary, it may be debated. Until then, all you have is one person's OPINION based on biblical teaching versus another opinion based on wishful thinking. Because her opinion deviates from the deviant opinion of the University, I guess she must be silenced, persecuted, and punished...liberal INtolerance in action.
- DOGODSWILL, on 05/06/2008, -8/+8AMEN & AMEN for the Truth
- groovsmyth, on 05/06/2008, -4/+3Forgive me for the possibly inappropriate levity. Michael Jackson bleached himself, but admittedly not overnight, so Dixon's assertion still stands.
- kemojr, on 05/06/2008, -9/+19There is nothing immoral about being black or handicapped. While I respect the rights of others to live as they please, I cannot accept the gay agenda.
- DOGODSWILL, on 05/06/2008, -9/+8 JESUS never acepted it and no GOD FEARING human will ever except it.If any man can take the BIBLE and prove it not to be a SIN that will lead you straight into HELL ,then I will except it .
- oestec, on 05/06/2008, -13/+18I have known many homosexuals in my time and they all had one thing in common: they were sexually molested as a child. Does anyone wonder why they want to teach elementary school children that homosexuality is OK? Indoctrination does occur, make no mistake. (look up the term "secondhand lesbian" if you require proof) Ms. Dixon is right on in her assessment; reparative therapy has literally helped thousands come out from under the yolk of homosexuality.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -8/+17Oh you have? That's some bad luck. I'm gay and I was never molested. Most of my gay friends were never molested - I'll bet I know more of them than you, too. You think they're teaching kids that gay is OK because they want to indoctrinate them. I think they're teaching kids that gay is OK so that fewer gay kids commit suicide. So we don't really see eye to eye. The big difference is that you, who are straight, claim to know the minds of gay people. You don't. If you're really gay, you know it long, long before you know anything about sex or sexuality. Trust me. You do. I sure did.
- ROaks, on 05/06/2008, -12/+5You have a spiritual and mental probalem.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -1/+13It's in your mind. ;) But I appreciate your effort to understand. Some people just hate the truth so much they'll never accept it.
- dshPls, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8I have to laugh as it's easily observed who the hateful and intolerant comments are from here.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -1/+13It's in your mind. ;) But I appreciate your effort to understand. Some people just hate the truth so much they'll never accept it.
- bioya1, on 05/06/2008, -8/+5Don't use the word "gay", it was once a clean word that connoted party-like spontaneity. Instead use "*****", which better describes what you are.
- dshPls, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8So lets see you say, "I had a gay time with Mike and Dan at the bowling Alley last night!" then.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+8Ha ha ha! It's so true. Next we'll have klansmen sheepishly asking if they can have the n-word back.
- lydecker, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6"Instead use "*****", which better describes what you are."
*****: any of a genus (*****) of hominids that includes modern humans.
Well, that does better describe it, but we're all humans, so it kinda defeats the purpose of referring to a specific group of humans. If you're trying to say we're all human, yes I agree, and we all should be treated like it.
Or, maybe you were referring to the prefix form, where *****- means one and the same, similar, alike.
- dshPls, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8So lets see you say, "I had a gay time with Mike and Dan at the bowling Alley last night!" then.
- groovsmyth, on 05/06/2008, -4/+2Trust you? No, thank you. I'll trust Holy Scripture instead. Forcing the majority to "celebrate" a perversion is not the same as asking them to live in harmony with and have compassion for homosexuals.
- ROaks, on 05/06/2008, -12/+5You have a spiritual and mental probalem.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -8/+17Oh you have? That's some bad luck. I'm gay and I was never molested. Most of my gay friends were never molested - I'll bet I know more of them than you, too. You think they're teaching kids that gay is OK because they want to indoctrinate them. I think they're teaching kids that gay is OK so that fewer gay kids commit suicide. So we don't really see eye to eye. The big difference is that you, who are straight, claim to know the minds of gay people. You don't. If you're really gay, you know it long, long before you know anything about sex or sexuality. Trust me. You do. I sure did.
- bioya1, on 05/06/2008, -14/+15Another example of *****-nazis in action.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -6/+13Another automatic text response from someone who didn't read the article. Also, the Nazis rounded up and gassed the gay folks, remember? Pink triangle? Learn some history?
- ROaks, on 05/06/2008, -11/+6We know the nazis history. The gay community is acting like nazis' is what bioya1 is saying..
- Kaffir, on 05/06/2008, -8/+5It's also historcal FACT that the Nazi SS were all homosexuals in the beginning and throughout much of the war. It was necessary as a requirement for entering the ranks.
Read the real story at: http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html
The Truth is NOT as homosexual pushers try to portray it.- canewediggit, on 05/06/2008, -2/+7you know, normally i just skim the comments on these articles for a good laugh. i generally have little/no desire to engage in the conversation b/c beating my head against a wall would produce more fruitful results. but you my friend, you have taken the cake. congrats, a new level of hilarity has been achieved.
- Kaffir, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2You don't answer or refute the article, but instead only tell me how you feel. Good for you! Lol!
- Kaffir, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2You don't answer or refute the article, but instead only tell me how you feel. Good for you! Lol!
- canewediggit, on 05/06/2008, -2/+7you know, normally i just skim the comments on these articles for a good laugh. i generally have little/no desire to engage in the conversation b/c beating my head against a wall would produce more fruitful results. but you my friend, you have taken the cake. congrats, a new level of hilarity has been achieved.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -6/+13Another automatic text response from someone who didn't read the article. Also, the Nazis rounded up and gassed the gay folks, remember? Pink triangle? Learn some history?
- Kaffir, on 05/06/2008, -10/+16This is an example of bigotry par excellence. The University of Toledo should be sued for discrimination, and denial of Constitutional rights! Levibo is right on target: "Here's another example of how the homosexual agenda is not just to be tolerated and accepted, but to have ANY and ALL speech that disagrees with their views silenced and banned. Get ready for Bible scripture to be branded 'hate speech.'"
It's time to take back America, save our children, and state the obvious: Homosexuality is harmful to public health, and is a CHOICE. America is all about choice, and choice is Freedom!- DOGODSWILL, on 05/06/2008, -9/+6AMEN and keep telling the TRUTH .JESUS said the TRUTH will set you free , but the lefties refuse to except the truth and keep leaning on their human understanding .
- shanson13, on 05/06/2008, -8/+11University President Lloyd Jacobs states "At least three women I dated in college subsequently declared themselves gay,"
Now there's a strong statement for not dating him...don't you think? I wonder why all his girlfriends "declared" themselves gay? Probably because they realized that he is a complete nut job and they desperately wanted out of the relationship?- Harvester1, on 05/06/2008, -2/+4I'm so glad somebody else caught that! It was the only thing in the article that made me laugh! Dugg up for being a hoot!
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -11/+13And if Crystal Dixon had written an article condemning Christianity, or Judaism, or Islam, or white people, or the handicapped, she would have suffered exactly the same suspension. Before launching into wild condemnations of 'those gays', read the University's anti-discrimination policy. It protects everyone. This is a private institution, it sets its own rules. Just like the church. If you violate the rules, you have to accept the consequences. Or haven't you ever heard of excommunication?
- JimmySpaza, on 05/06/2008, -14/+12Bullcrap! If Mrs. Dixon had written anything critical of Christianity or white people, then she would have been held up as a great communicator of ideals and her free speech rights defended ad nauseum. BUT...because she was critical of homosexual lifestyles, she is denounced by the same bureaucrats who talk of free speech in one breath and then condemn the speech with which they disagree with the next breath.
Hypocrites.
It's not like she used college resources to promote her opinion. She did it on her own time and with a non-college newspaper. Talk about politically correct nazis. They just cannot stand dissenting opinions to their way of life.- ROaks, on 05/06/2008, -9/+5Right on Jimmy, thus, as stated in an earlier post the equating the perverted community to nazis.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+12"Bullcrap! If Mrs. Dixon had written anything critical of Christianity or white people, then she would have been held up as a great communicator of ideals and her free speech rights defended ad nauseum."
Oh, so I guess you didn't go and read the University's anti-discrimination policy after all. You just said 'bullcrap' and followed it up with some assumptions. You really should go and read the policy, it's very clear on who it protects. Religious belief is even mentioned before sexuality in the list of protected groups. And yes, she did use the college resources to promote her opinion, and the agenda of a -specific-, named therapy group - this alone is grounds for suspension.
Seriously, before you launch into these tirades, you really should get the facts straight. Read the university's anti-discrimination policy before pretending you know what it states. You're totally wrong, because you haven't read a thing.- Nannybell, on 05/06/2008, -3/+2Could you please quote the relevant part of their anti-discrimination policy and possibly provide the link, since most of us probably don't have that at hand.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7Here ya go, in pretty plain language:
http://www.utoledo.edu/diversity/ut_definition_of_ ...
Human diversity is variety in group presence and interactions. It includes, but is not limited to, age, color, ethnicity, gender, religion, disabilities, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, gender identity, and national origin. In promoting diversity, the University pledges to respect and value personal uniqueness and differences; to attract and retain diverse faculty, staff, and students; to challenge stereotypes; and to promote sensitivity and inclusion. The University understands the value that a diverse student body, faculty, staff, and administration bring to its educational environment, the metropolitan community and beyond. The University takes seriously its commitment to diversity as expressed in the Mission Statement and the Strategic Directions Plan. - Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7Hmm, the editor seems to cut off the link. Just go to the university's main page and click on the Diversity link under the upper left Welcome column. It's under UT Definitions of Diversity.
- idoj, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7@Nannybell, this site is currently having traffic problems, but when it's back up, there's a direct link to the PDF file here too: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/05/05/tole ...
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7Here ya go, in pretty plain language:
- Nannybell, on 05/06/2008, -3/+2Could you please quote the relevant part of their anti-discrimination policy and possibly provide the link, since most of us probably don't have that at hand.
- groovsmyth, on 05/06/2008, -6/+1Wow! Yes I have heard of Excommunication. But prelates seem woefully hesitant to use that authority. Conversely, PC "hate" police have an itchy trigger finger!
- JimmySpaza, on 05/06/2008, -14/+12Bullcrap! If Mrs. Dixon had written anything critical of Christianity or white people, then she would have been held up as a great communicator of ideals and her free speech rights defended ad nauseum. BUT...because she was critical of homosexual lifestyles, she is denounced by the same bureaucrats who talk of free speech in one breath and then condemn the speech with which they disagree with the next breath.
- hugothecommie, on 05/06/2008, -13/+14It is against the law to say anything negative about gays. You can say anything about anyone else but never ever say anything about gays or even Muslims. Now you can trash Christians all you want, even kill them is legal in some countries. The left in this country wants the same here in this country. Like child rapists. Remember the outcry when the pope was here? Now did these same people come out and condemn the teachers unions? No! Because it's alright for liberals to rape, kill and torture anyone they want. That is what they do. Or haven't you ever heard of communism.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+12"No! Because it's alright for liberals to rape, kill and torture anyone they want."
Oh really? You sure that isn't just you being childishly hysterical? Grow up, nobody is going to take this psychotic delusion seriously. - chaosium, on 05/06/2008, -2/+11"It is against the law to say anything negative about gays."
Nope, but thankfully at institutions where people are educated, the spiritual equivalent of trash isn't welcome.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+12"No! Because it's alright for liberals to rape, kill and torture anyone they want."
- mattalice, on 05/06/2008, -11/+16Values.... The university has values? They change daily with the tide. May I make a suggestion Crystal? www.alliancedefensefund.org will eat the university alive.
- JimmySpaza, on 05/06/2008, -11/+10Yeah, the ADF has been kicking the crap out of politically correct bureaucrats in universities for years now. They have an excellent win-loss ratio so much so now that a mere letter from them to colleges is enough to make most of them back down.
The ADF has won serious financial settlements and caused many leftwing university morons a lot of embarassment.
- JimmySpaza, on 05/06/2008, -11/+10Yeah, the ADF has been kicking the crap out of politically correct bureaucrats in universities for years now. They have an excellent win-loss ratio so much so now that a mere letter from them to colleges is enough to make most of them back down.
- DOGODSWILL, on 05/06/2008, -12/+9 To try and justify HOMOSEXUALITY as not being a SIN of ABOMINATION is nothing more than SPITTING directly into the face of our SAVIOR and LORD , JESUS CHRIST .It's ceases to amaze me, how the LIBERAL mindset people (the world over) will use any PHD'S oppion,SOCIAL STUDYS , HUMANIST BOOKS , COUNSELORS , PHYSICIANS , PHYSIOGNOMY , SOCIOLOGY ,and you name it ,to try and prove the BIBLE to be wrong.
- dshPls, on 05/06/2008, -2/+5Cancel your AOL account please.
- JaelsTentPeg, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1Why should he cancel his AOL account? Plenty of people spat in the Saviors face, just read the account of the crucifixion. God does call sin of homosexuality an abomination. There is a difference between sin and the sinner. Christ loved the sinner so much that he died for those sins, He does ask repentance though. I don't understand why he would have to cancel his AOL account? Because he spoke his mind? That's funny, did you see the ad, of the Last Supper, that a group of homosexual put together in San Fran? Jesus and His Apostles were all dressed in S&M gear, surrounded by bizarre looking dildo's. That was pretty rude, but, protected by "free speech" I guess. As well, DOGODSWILL has those same equal rights under the law.
- dshPls, on 05/06/2008, -2/+5Cancel your AOL account please.
- rkeyo, on 05/06/2008, -9/+11The ignorance and hypocrisy of the Lords of Tolerance is enough to make one puke...
- victorypup, on 05/06/2008, -8/+11The Sodomite community have positioned themselves to be, "in your face". Normal people have responded to the cry for TOLERANCE, until we have no tolerance for decency.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -6/+16My goodness, it's just the same three or four of you, isn't it? ;) Every article, I keep expecting to find a large group of various users and various opinions, and yet it's always the same small group of detractors saying exactly the same things: those evil *****. Same propaganda lines, same self-congratulating condemnation, same lack of action.
No wonder y'all are losing ground to "2%" of the population.- Coven, on 05/06/2008, -7/+14I don't even read their posts anymore. All I see under their names is "*thump thump thump*"
I think I'll follow suit and start living my life according to a book too. The Three Billy Goats Gruff sounds like a good start. I'm no longer going to cross any bridges on the grounds that my book says that there is a troll under there. - anstice85, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Isn't it hilarious? I saw the number of thumbs up to hateful comments in this article and thought Digg had gone crazy.
- Coven, on 05/06/2008, -7/+14I don't even read their posts anymore. All I see under their names is "*thump thump thump*"
- idoj, on 05/06/2008, -1/+14"The university’s anti-bias policies explicitly state that discrimination protections cover sexual orientation, and university officials have condemned anti-gay discrimination." (Taken from here: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/05/05/tole ...
There's no story here! This woman violated University policy. Look at the equal opportunity policy yourself: http://www.utoledo.edu/policies/administration/div ... Whether you agree or disagree with what she wrote doesn't really matter. She violated her own contract.- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -3/+11Oh, now you've taken away all the fun. Stupid facts, always interfering! It's funny, she doesn't think of it as a civil rights struggle...if she'd actually lived through that struggle, she might recognize that the language, tactics, and propaganda are the same. You just need to swap the name of the target group.
- PoKansasFarmer, on 05/06/2008, -7/+3I thought all college staff was tenured and could do and say whatever they wish (Ward Churchill).
- groovsmyth, on 05/06/2008, -7/+3No Story? You have declared that the debate is ended then? Much like abortion is a settled issue? That's exactly what we're talking about here. The "tolerant" liberals don't want to value free speech of EVERYONE.
- idoj, on 05/06/2008, -2/+8"No Story? You have declared that the debate is ended then?"
No. There really is no debate in this case. Read the links, view the university policy that the woman signed and agreed to. As I stated earlier, it doesn't matter whether you agree or disagree with what she said, she violated the conditions of her employment. What is there to debate? - eir574, on 05/06/2008, -4/+4If there's to be a debate here, then it should be over whether private institutions have the right to hire and fire employees based on their behavior in their personal lives. That's perfectly legal right now in a number of states. Employers have fired employees for smoking even while not at work, or for being seen in public consuming a competitor's product. If we change the law, though, then we'd also have to consider whether religious institutions should get exemptions. Recently, there was a story on digg about a professor who was forced to leave his college because he'd gotten divorced and refused to discuss his personal life with staff members so that they could determine whether he divorced for reasons that were consistent with the school's religious positions.
- idoj, on 05/06/2008, -2/+8"No Story? You have declared that the debate is ended then?"
- PoKansasFarmer, on 05/06/2008, -9/+5No intelligence allowed...again. "Do not commit thought crimes against gays". Free speech in academia does not exist.
- Tookson, on 05/06/2008, -9/+6The homosexual indoctrination camps we call "universities" are blighting our youth and defiling our culture with perversion. Can I stop paying taxes now? It seems worse than just money going to waste. They are using tax dollars to brainwash our youth with filthy lies.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+10They're also giving your youth degrees and useful skills, which allow the country to continue functioning. If you're more comfortable with theocratic education control, try living in Iran or Saudi Arabia. We all know there's no brainwashing going on there, and they hate gays even more than you. Apparently, Iran doesn't have any! Except the ones they execute.
- Tookson, on 05/06/2008, -6/+1I don't hate gays. I have acquaintances who are struggling with that same problem and I certainly don't hate them. I also have friends who have drug problems and I don't hate them either. I do despise it when people in positions of authority use their power to tell the impressionable that 'drugs are fine just try it, you'll like it, and besides it's already in you and you can't fight it, so just give in to it.' I despise it when they lie to the impressionable in that way because I realize that it is such a rip off and a waste of a life. Homosexuality, in the same way, is a spiritual and moral rip off and results in spiritual death for those who refuse to repent. Has your heart become hard to the truth? That's not hate, that's life everlasting.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7But nobody here has used a position of authority to tell anyone anything. It's a newspaper's opinion page, it's not a class. I respect your right to believe what you do, that I and everyone like me will burn for all time after we die, but when horrific images, slander, and lies are used to terrorize children, I am reminded of how masturbation used to make you blind. Or how shellfish are an abomination. Or how slavery is ordained. Do you respect those biblical values, too? When you take the whole package seriously, I'll believe you're basing your argument on faith. Until then, it's just selective, cherry-picked bigotry, pure and simple. And yeah...the root of that is hate.
- Tookson, on 05/06/2008, -5/+0Lutrasimilis, perhaps you missed the point, or dodged the point of the article. It's called mass censorship of the view that homosexuality is not morally equivolent to heterosexuality, and that individuals are not born slaves to homosexual passion. Censorship is the point here.
You do not seem to know Biblical values. Typical Lefty slander of God's Word. The proscription of various dietary items served a divine purpose of setting apart God's people from the pagans. Each Levitical law has a meaning and a purpose. They have been fulfilled in Christ. You don't know about that, I guess. Christ set the slaves of sin free. Don't walk in that slavery anymore, you can be set free in Christ. And the truth about the American Civil War is that is was premised and justified on Biblical values. But they don't teach you that in your indoctrination camps these days, do they?- mattalice, on 05/07/2008, -2/+0Wow. Well stated. I Totally agree. I wish I could be as articulate as you!!! (not being sarcastic)
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1"The proscription of various dietary items served a divine purpose of setting apart God's people from the pagans. Each Levitical law has a meaning and a purpose."
Oh, I've read every single one of those cherished admonishments, and heard a wide variety of fumbling, inarticulate attempts to explain why (for instance) one 'abomination' is now acceptable while another is not. If you really did have biblical values, and treated every one of Paul's pronouncements with equal weight, you'd be expected to stone unruly children to death. You'd be expected to burn down any city filled with unbelievers. You'd have killed your own wife, were she not a virgin on your wedding night. You'd be telling women to be quiet in your presence, and never to speak in church.
If you're not taking the whole package, you're not being a Christian - your 'values' are a sham. You're just picking your favorite sin, and using it to distract yourself and others from your own shortcomings. I think you're the one who needs to open your eyes, my friend.
And please, if you're going to answer, don't dodge again. Tell me if you're practicing the complete package, or just a few select articles. Answer honestly, and plainly.
- Tookson, on 05/06/2008, -6/+1I don't hate gays. I have acquaintances who are struggling with that same problem and I certainly don't hate them. I also have friends who have drug problems and I don't hate them either. I do despise it when people in positions of authority use their power to tell the impressionable that 'drugs are fine just try it, you'll like it, and besides it's already in you and you can't fight it, so just give in to it.' I despise it when they lie to the impressionable in that way because I realize that it is such a rip off and a waste of a life. Homosexuality, in the same way, is a spiritual and moral rip off and results in spiritual death for those who refuse to repent. Has your heart become hard to the truth? That's not hate, that's life everlasting.
- Truthlover23, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Tookson, you are so right. The homosexuals have embraced deception for so long that the mind is seared. They cannot understand that when someone shows them (from God's word) that their choice of sexual orientation is an abomination in God's eyes, that it is being done out of love and concern. They only think they are being attacked. If they were living a life of purity, the truth would not convict them as it does. Most people that are approached as doing wrong will always play the victim; but those whose hearts are open to the truth will see the wrong revealed and repent. Unless a person with a reprobate mind will open their heart to truth, their mind continues in a downward spiral. A lot of these homosexuals have heard the truth, but continue to reject it. But with God, everything is possible. God loves the sinner and hates the sin. Everyone has sin, but not everyone has repented of their sins, accepted Jesus as their Savior, and been forgiven of their sins. Too many people, homosexuals alike, don't understand that the time is getting shorter for them to see the Light. Death sometimes comes upon people when least expected, and then it is too late. If they were to die tonight, do they know beyond a shadow of a doubt where they would go for eternity? Not believing in spiritual things doesn't make them go away, as some might think. Same with believing that God would not send a person, who tries to live decently, to an eternal hell. Since the topic is homosexuality, I am sure that there are a lot of homosexuals who live as decently as heterosexuals think they do. But with God, all of our decent living are as filthy rags, else why would he have needed to send Jesus to die on the cross for us? It is so sad they are deceived and can't see when someone might care and reach out to them with the truth of the Bible.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+10They're also giving your youth degrees and useful skills, which allow the country to continue functioning. If you're more comfortable with theocratic education control, try living in Iran or Saudi Arabia. We all know there's no brainwashing going on there, and they hate gays even more than you. Apparently, Iran doesn't have any! Except the ones they execute.
- KCLorelei39, on 05/06/2008, -8/+2From the article:
"Miller said he disagreed with Dixon, but acknowledged she had the right to express her beliefs.
"The university operates in an atmosphere of idea exchange, and while I recognize the institution's desire to distance itself from her, this is a basic free speech issue and I am disappointed she has been punished for expressing her views,” he said."
I did a little digging, and actually, the university can suspend or fire her as they please, for her speech on campus. Sad, but true. I am unclear if the university can legally suspend or fire an employee for her speech off campus, though.
Free speech laws and harassment laws seem to be increasingly at odds these days.
I did find an interesting site addressing free speech as it relates to harassment laws:
Freedom of Speech vs.
Workplace Harassment Law —
A Growing Conflict
http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/harass/
Civil laws aside...Ms Dixon should have recalled that Jesus said in various ways, to leave the spiritually dead and blind alone to their destruction. Universities are increasingly 'safe places' for the blind leaders of the blind.
I think she will have no problem finding employment elsewhere that is more fitting with her own religious viewpoints.- eir574, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7"I did a little digging, and actually, the university can suspend or fire her as they please, for her speech on campus. Sad, but true. I am unclear if the university can legally suspend or fire an employee for her speech off campus, though. "
How is this different than the case that was on digg a few days ago where a professor was given a year to leave a university because he refused to discuss his divorce with university staff so that they could determine whether it was in line with biblical standards?
In many states, employers can indeed fire employees for their behavior while they're not at work. There was a story on 60 Minutes last year about a business owner who gave his employees a year to stop smoking. Those who continued to smoke, even only when they weren't at work, were fired. It was perfectly legal. There was also a case where a person who worked for a beer company (I can't remember which one) was fired for being seen in public drinking a different type of beer. He'd ordered the 'correct' brand, but the waitress accidentally brought him the wrong one. Someone else from the company offered to fix the problem for him, and he declined, saying that he didn't want to make a big deal out of it. Shortly thereafter, he was fired. Perfectly legal.- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -0/+8If I were a newspaper columnist at Oral Roberts University, and I wrote an article in support of the 'homosexual lifestyle', I would be fired before the ink was dry. You're absolutely right, private institutions set their own rules. She broke these rules, which she agreed to honor when she was hired by the university. If she didn't like the rules, she could have just blogged her opinion and had an even bigger audience. Instead, she tried to use the paper as a soapbox.
- KCLorelei39, on 05/06/2008, -4/+2eir, you said: How is this different than the case that was on digg a few days ago where a professor was given a year to leave a university because he refused to discuss his divorce with university staff so that they could determine whether it was in line with biblical standards?
I'm not familiar with that story, do you have a link?
I didn't see this story necessarily as a '***** vs hetero' story, really. I know WND gets a bit hysterical on occasion in order to sound the alarm, so to speak, to Biblical Christians. Perhaps they are only trying to chronicle the signs of the times; but don't think that the political aspects of homosexuality, and abortion, too, for that matter, are the hills I'm willing to die on here on Digg.
While the rise of homosexual acceptance does concern me, I don't look to man's laws for a solution. Likewise, while I would love to overturn Roe v Wade yesterday, lol, I don't foresee it happening through political action (though Wilburforce and the slave trade are often on my mind, lol, I could be mistaken as God works through humans).
Speaking only for myself, I see a parallel in modern Christians trying to set up God's kingdom now, and the Jews who thought Jesus was going to set a political kingdom when He was among them.
Christianity as a modern political force hasn't worked out very well lately, as all those Christians can attest to that are sorry they voted for Dubya twice. I'm one of them, much to my chagrin, as I bought into that nonsense briefly, too, lol. no more voting for the lesser of 2 evils for this child of the Living God!
I remember what I was, before God called me back from my years of wandering far from Him. I know what He has done for me, and I long to introduce folks to my Betrothed : )
If someone doesn't know God, how can they possibly want to do what He says? lol, people claiming to be His followers can't hardly obey Him consistently, yet we want to impose our standards on others that don't know Him, when we cannot collectively keep those standards, either.
I hope yawl don't wish to debate any of the above, lol, as I'm mostly musing to myself while letting you get a peek in this post : ) - eir574, on 05/06/2008, -0/+6@KCLorelei,
The story was here: http://digg.com/educational/Wheaton_College_profes ... . While many people thought that the college had somehow broken the law, they haven't done so.- KCLorelei39, on 05/07/2008, -4/+1ok, I remember seeing the headline but I hadn't read the article before. thanks for the link.
so, back to your original question of how this case differs from the other case....well, one obvious difference to me is that the teacher at Wheaton was let go because he would not discuss his private life with his employers, so that they could decide whether or not to retain him. I can respect his decision and I applaud him for his desire to protect his estranged spouse from public embarrassment and scrutiny. He knew the school's policies, disagreed with them, but in the end he chose to respect and abide by those policies. He did an honorable thing.
The other obvious difference is that one school was a religiously-oriented school; the other was mainstream and secular, not religiously-oriented.
Unlike the teacher in this article, the teacher at Wheaton didn't go public with his views or opinions of others' lives or behavior. She seems to have been disciplined for her speaking out publicly; again, I think this is an example of the growing conflicts between free speech and efforts to protect people from 'harassment', and also conflicts between two groups that are often at odds.
Sometimes it seems to me that some people wish to define harassment simply as viewpoints or speech they dislike, in some instances.
How can we reasonably expect folks to keep their faith in a box, only to be displayed away from the job? Should we then require folks that are not mainstream in their sexual preferences to hide that part of themselves while on the job?
It's a conflict and honestly, I don't have any solutions that can be achieved via man's legislative attempts.
The one involved a teacher's own private life; the other involved a public declaration by a teacher. I'm not sure where the two cases are similar, honestly. But I do understand that colleges have a certain image they wish to project, and protect, and those teachers who cannot support that image can either work for change in that school's image, or seek other employment.- eir574, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6"well, one obvious difference to me is that the teacher at Wheaton was let go because he would not discuss his private life with his employers, so that they could decide whether or not to retain him. "
In the end, that's why he was let go, but the school also would have fired him if he'd agreed to talk about the divorce and if they'd decided that it wasn't in line with their ethics. The school has retained the right to fire people for behavior outside of work.
"The other obvious difference is that one school was a religiously-oriented school; the other was mainstream and secular, not religiously-oriented. "
That's true, and if as a society we decide to pass laws that prohibit employers for firing employees based on activities in their personal lives, there could nonetheless be a religious exemption.
"It's a conflict and honestly, I don't have any solutions that can be achieved via man's legislative attempts."
I doubt there is a legislative solution. If we want to enjoy the freedoms granted to us by the constitution, then we have to accept that the government can never produce an ideal society (whatever that means to each of us) by force of law.
- eir574, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6"well, one obvious difference to me is that the teacher at Wheaton was let go because he would not discuss his private life with his employers, so that they could decide whether or not to retain him. "
- KCLorelei39, on 05/07/2008, -4/+1ok, I remember seeing the headline but I hadn't read the article before. thanks for the link.
- eir574, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7"I did a little digging, and actually, the university can suspend or fire her as they please, for her speech on campus. Sad, but true. I am unclear if the university can legally suspend or fire an employee for her speech off campus, though. "
- G3eeze, on 05/06/2008, -10/+2Gays are quick to point out that being "gay" is a normal, natural way of living and is not an illness. On the other hand, they claim protected status. How can this be? Oh yeah, thats right, administrators are looking for gays to infiltrate teaching positions along with NAMBLA and other such groups to further their respective life styles by indoctrinating our children in class. What a great way to operate in the open and be immune from hard persecution. What a great group of administrators and educators have been fostered in the land of the free and the home of the depraved!
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8Don't ask yourself rhetorical questions if you're trying to prove a point, it looks ridiculous. I know how much some people love to talk about NAMBLA, an organization which disbanded in 1996 (do the research), but you're so deluded you don't even realize that this is a university newspaper - the article wasn't even about 'the children'. Also, the university newspaper wasn't being taught in class. It's a newspaper. Please, read the article before launching into the automatic snarling defense of pre-conceived notions? It helps to know what the subject is.
- eir574, on 05/06/2008, -1/+8Are you suggesting protected status is not appropriate for conditions that are natural? Should there be no anti-discrimination laws based on gender or race? After all, those things are natural. There's no contradiction there.
- CR250R, on 05/06/2008, -9/+3When same sex partners can procreate, then I'll believe it is not an abomination against life. Until then, the homosexual community will NEVER be able to convince me that it is normal. No matter what kind of putrid filth they spew.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+9You must despise infertile couples too, I suppose? After all, how dare two people get together if they can't reproduce? It's an abomination, is it not? Don't mistake your personal distaste or self-distilled bile for reality - the perversion is in your head.
- nippinawassee, on 05/06/2008, -7/+6She's sadly right. the homosexual community have tried for years to tag onto the NAACP group professing that they too are being discriminated against as the Blacks experience... I'm not Black but if Iwere, I would be enraged that a group such as the homosexual community dare to compare their fight to that of the Black community. Like she so aptly pointed out: she won't wake up white...
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/06/2008, -2/+8Meh, some people have formed the association. Not all. I certainly don't, but I can understand why others do. Tell me, if it's so incredibly different, why does the language sound exactly the same if you replace 'negro' with '*****'? I wouldn't say the struggle is the same - it couldn't possibly be, but the same strategy is employed by the detractors. Group X is after your children. Group X is invading the schools. Group X is poisoning the country. Group X hates America. The similarities are stunning, as if the two shared some kind of common root. I wonder what that could be?
- Christianptriot, on 05/06/2008, -7/+3Once again proving to me that those who DEMAND tolerance of others for their lifestyle or position are the most INTOLERANT of anyone who speaks out against them.
- sexydarin, on 05/06/2008, -6/+4***** your diversity! Sue the goddam univesity for as much as you can.
- bobinohio, on 05/06/2008, -7/+2This is why I will NEVER contribute a dime to the University of Toledo. As an alumn, this kind of "thought police" (thank you Tammy Bruce) makes me sick. I guess the First Amendment doesn't apply to UT.
- bioya1, on 05/07/2008, -9/+2Like moths to the flame I see the usual panoply of ***** responding to ANY homosexual article, including this one. No amount of specious debate or shameless explanations can counter the feeling of revulsion the 98% of humanity has against the 2%. I can see why ***** have it in for those who quote the Bible, for there is no real defense for their proclivities in light of the word of God. Love the sinner, hate the sin.
*****, Digging me won't absolve you.- anstice85, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6I am a straight woman and I think that hatred is disgusting, that's why I'm digging you down.
- bioya1, on 05/10/2008, -3/+1Digging YOU down on account that you're an emotional idiot.
- anstice85, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6I am a straight woman and I think that hatred is disgusting, that's why I'm digging you down.
- egalicki, on 05/07/2008, -8/+6I thought gays have all the same rights as everybody else, except the very special right to have nobody allowed to disagree with them.
I guess this makes them super-citizens, and gives them rights far above and beyond what the rest of us normal people have.
Too bad people fell for this born gay tripe. There are ex-gays, but the gay activists want to silence them, and not allow their voices to be heard on any campus.
Gay is a choice. Scream and shout and object and get shrinks to squeal about it - but nothing changes the truth. Anybody can stop being gay, it just might be hard, but so are other things.
Wake up America, stop letting these aberrations and abominations destroy our country.- anstice85, on 05/07/2008, -2/+4Do you have proof that being gay is a choice? Didn't think so.
- Lutrasimilis, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3Ex-gays and ex-Christians have something in common - neither does much to convince the other party.
- bioya1, on 05/10/2008, -4/+1Likewise for the fag nation.
- sphira, on 05/08/2008, -2/+2in reply to anstice85
"Do you have proof that being gay is a choice? Didn't think so."
To be:
To equal in identity:
"To be a Christian was to be a Roman" (James Bryce).
Funny, but their example is of being Christian!
Websters.com
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/being
This is the only appropriate meaning of "being" in the context you use.
Just as "being" a Christian is a choice, so too is being homosexual!- Lutrasimilis, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3Most people don't choose when to have feelings. Maybe you've never had a crush on someone, but you will find that such feelings and emotions are not something that can be just switched off by choice. You -know- this. Don't expect people who feel same-sex attraction to just cancel out all their feelings because a certain portion of the population orders them to...for no better reason than their own personal pride and comfort. Ain't gonna happen.
- k8cpa, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2Trent Lott said it best... " "When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either."
- frpearson, on 05/10/2008, -0/+0Dixon will be rich; Jacubs is a Fruit?
- 10QGZus, on 05/11/2008, -2/+1The hatred and intolerance of those who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle is very evident here. Look at all the down diggs....it's amazing. So much for freedom of speech and tolerance!
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by