Religious discrimination at the University of Georgia
Mike S. Adams (back to web version) |
SendPosted on 11/09/2004 1:43:54 AM PST by L.N. Smithee
townhall.com
Printer-friendly version
Religious discrimination at the University of Georgia
Mike S. Adams (back to web version) | Send
November 9, 2004
Author’s note: The president of the University of Georgia is also named Mike Adams. We are not related.
Dear President Adams (phone # 706.542.1214):
I was recently informed about a possible case of religious discrimination against a (now former) cheerleading coach at the University of Georgia (UGA). Before I ask you a few questions about that case, I have several preliminary questions regarding the gay “safe zone” at UGA. My questions pertain specifically to the “safe space” portion of your public university website (http://www.uga.edu/safespace/), which has a subsection entitled “religion and homosexuality.”
The UGA website claims that the “Old Testament clearly indicates that King David had a homosexual relationship with Jonathan, the son of King Saul.” Could you explain the basis of that contention?
The UGA website claims that “the Hebrew Old Testament clearly documents a homosexual relationship between the prophet Daniel and a man named Ashpenaz, and indicates that God put Daniel into that relationship.” Could you explain the basis of that contention? Is the university website accurately characterizing the will of God?
The UGA website claims that “much to the embarrassment of the Vatican, the catholic theologian Boswell has uncovered proof that, up until the fourteenth century, the church was routinely performing wedding ceremonies for same-sexed couples.” Will UGA’s state-sponsored campaign for same-sexed marriage continue in light of the recent rejection of same-sexed marriage by Georgia voters? Isn’t it now a moot point?
The UGA website claims that there was “no organized opposition to homosexuality” either from the church or from society until the thirteenth century. What does that mean? When do you suppose that the Bible was written? When did opposition to internet pornography first emerge? Do you understand the relevance of my question to the present conversation?
The UGA website claims that “King James, who ordered the English translation of the Bible, which bears his name, was a homosexual, a fact of which the translators were well aware.” Could you provide a source for this contention and explain its relevance?
The UGA website claims that “there is absolutely no condemnation of homosexuality in the Hebrew Old Testament.” Was that a misprint or is the author of that statement actually serious?
The UGA website claims that “there is absolutely no condemnation of homosexuality in the Greek New Testament.” Was that a misprint or is the author of that statement actually serious?
The UGA website claims that “all English translations (of the Bible) have been deliberately mistranslated to make it appear that God condemned homosexuality.” How many people were involved in that conspiracy? How long did it last? Is it still in effect?
The UGA website claims that the idea that Sodom and Gomorrah “were destroyed for homosexuality is a man-made notion that is unsupported by scriptures.” Was that a misprint or is the author of that statement actually serious?
The UGA website claims that “The Greek New Testament, while not condemning homosexuality, does forbid people to attempt to alter their sexual orientation.” Could you give me the relevant Bible verse for that assertion?
The UGA website claims that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality “as a sexual orientation.” Does it say anything about bestiality as a sexual orientation? How about pedophilia as a sexual orientation?
Why does the UGA website (quoting the story of the woman caught in adultery) end with the words “let him (who is without sin) be the first to throw a stone at her”? The reference provided is John 8:3-11. The end of the passage is actually “From now on sin no more.” Was that an accident or did the university omit that last verse on purpose? Is such a misrepresentation an example of academic freedom? Or is it just liberal propaganda?
The UGA website states that “Jesus himself never married not (sic) had children. Other parts of the Bible simply can’t be forced into the ‘family values’ obsession of the Fundamentalists.” Was this meant to mock Fundamentalists? Shouldn’t their sexual orientation be respected, too? Is it nice to call Fundamentalists “obsessed?” This statement was not implying that Jesus was gay…or was it?
The UGA website states that “The Book of Ruth sensitively portrays bonding and devotion between two women.” Does that mean that Ruth was a lesbian, too?
I ask you these questions because I would like to get a sense of the university’s official positions on religious matters. Of course, you may point out that no one was coerced into reading these materials, which are highly offensive to most Christians. You might even point out that the expression of these views by university personnel, even on a taxpayer supported website, does not constitute an endorsement of religion by the University of Georgia.
But be careful how you answer these questions, President Adams. I have some more questions about your former cheerleading coach. I look forward to your timely response.
I wonder if President Adams will have the courage to address columnist Adams. My guess is no, but I will stay tuned -- I don't know anything about this cheerleading coach business. How could religious issues become a point of contention in cheerleading to such an extent?
Sure sounds like UGA has an *homo agenda*, doesn't it?
“One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool. “
I don't know who said the above quote, but it sure applies to modern day academia.
Yep!
That's what we've been saying for years up in Tennessee. :D
*Dodges flying objects*
How can we know if he ever responds?
I'm sure there's more to it than that, but that's my understanding.
Unreal.
Athletic Association files response to suit by former cheerleading coach
E-mail This Article
Printable Version
Discuss your opinion on this
ATHENS, Ga. (AP) -- The University of Georgia Athletic Association has filed its response to a suit by fired former cheerleading coach Marilou Braswell.
The association says in a motion that the association fired Braswell based on her retaliation against a student -- NOT for her religious beliefts.
Association attorney Ed Tolley filed the motion to dismiss Braswell's federal civil rights lawsuit and a supporting brief Tuesday in U-S District Court in Atlanta.
The Athens Banner-Herald obtained a copy of the brief yesterday and says that Tolley contends Braswell canNOT prove the university infringed on her constitional rights when it fired her August 23rd.
She was fired two weeks after Braswell read a prepared statement informing cheerleaders that teammate Jaclyn Steele had made allegations of religious discrimination against her.
The 21-year-old Steele -- who is Jewish -- said the university's cheerling program has Christian overtones. She said her own non-participation in pre-game prayerser and Bible studies at Braswell's home made her feel like an outcast.
The association says it told Braswell NOT to discuss Steele's status with the other cheerleaders
save for later
It appears she took herself off the squad.
How's that UT girls' basketball team looking this year?
AFAIK, as good as ever. I'm in the wrong part of the world to get regular news, though.
As long as the beat UCONN, I'll be happy. :P
Ping
Okay, what I said is what I remember from reading a little paragraph about a month ago, in one of the Denver papers. Haven't been back to GA in a while.
Apparently a pervert to the end, as David was ill dying, a girl was fetched to "lie with him and keep him warm." (The author of scripture made it clear that David did not "have intercourse with her.") Ha, right.
The story of David depicts a man with dendecies of our our Klintoon.
Makes you wonder when it comes down to it...what is truth.
So Daniel had a homosexual relationship with a eunuch?
So Daniel had a homosexual relationship with a eunuch?
David appeared indifferent as his daughter was raped by her brother. David did not really discipline his rapist son.
David was "very wroth" when he heard about the rape of Tamar by Amnon. Under Old Testament law there were several technicalities concerning justice for rape. One involved whether the victim cried out or not. Also the implication in the text is that Amnon could have had Tamar given to him for a wife had he but asked the king.
Whatever punishment the king meted out was not disclosed, if any, but evidently it wasn't enough to suit Tamar's brother Absalom, who had Amnon slaughtered at a sheep-shearing festival. He had to flee, having killed a prince (even if it was his own brother). And the account says David "was comforted concerning Amnon, seeing he was dead." See 2 Samuel 13 for the story.
Apparently a pervert to the end, as David was ill dying, a girl was fetched to "lie with him and keep him warm." (The author of scripture made it clear that David did not "have intercourse with her.") Ha, right.
And the account there says that the aged king "gat no heat" (1 Kings 1:1), and that's why the maiden was fetched. That speaks of hypothyroidism, and if that is what it was, one of the symptoms is a diminished libido.
And besides, the only record of the incident -- a contemporaneous one -- says he didn't have intercourse with her. In the absence of any contradictory record or evidence, the contemporaneous account is the one to go with. Unless you just want to throw a hostile opinion out there.
The story of David depicts a man with dendecies of our our Klintoon.
David was a fallible, normal human. Yet he heartily acknowledged his own failures and faults before God, grieved over them, trusted God, and looked to Him for forgiveness (see Psalm 51), and obtained what are called "the sure mercies of David" (Isaiah 55:3).
Makes you wonder when it comes down to it...what is truth.
You can't do any better than the Bible. If you'll trust it.
Excellent post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.