Skip to comments.Pasadena's Eric Walsh loses Georgia job offer after controversial [antihomosexual] sermons
Posted on 05/17/2014 7:34:36 AM PDT by daniel1212
Georgia health officials on Friday retracted a job offer made to Pasadena's former public health director, who had come under fire for controversial remarks he made on homosexuality and evolution.
Dr. Eric Walsh, a Seventh-day Adventist preacher, interviewed for the position about two weeks ago and had received an offer letter with a start date of mid-June.
But Walsh never mentioned that he had recently been placed on leave from his job in Pasadena because of controversial sermons he gave on homosexuality and evolution, Georgia officials said.
The sermons were discovered during a background check that happens as the last phase of the hiring process, spokesman Ryan Deal said....
The move comes two days after Walsh resigned from his position as the director of Pasadena's public health department.
Walsh, who had directed the department since 2010, was widely scrutinized after he was selected to replace openly gay screenwriter Dustin Lance Black as Pasadena City College's commencement speaker.
Students at the college found videos of his sermons online, transcribed them and shared them with media. Walsh then canceled his commencement appearance, citing a scheduling conflict, and Black ended up giving the speech.
(Excerpt) Read more at scpr.org ...
After the school gave itself a black eye over a rescinded commencement speech invitation to Oscar-winning screenwriter Dustin Lance Black, it announced that the replacement commencement speaker would be Dr. Eric Walsh, Pasadenas director of public health....
Black, 39, would have been a terrific and inspiring speaker. But PCC President Mark W. Rocha, Deputy Supt. Robert Bell and Pasadena Area Community College Board of Trustees President Anthony Fellow feared that an obscure 2009 incident involving a purloined sex tape featuring Black with a former boyfriend would give the college a bad name..
Walsh, the replacement speaker, seems like an accomplished person. His online bio says he has championed maternal and child health issues, violence prevention and is committed to the highest level of care for individuals infected with HIV.
He is also a devout Seventh-day Adventist and a proponent of intelligent design who has said that anyone who teaches the theory of evolution is a Satanist minister doing the devils handiwork. /www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-ra-pasadena-college-commencement-speaker-fiasco-20140429-story.html#axzz30aCUnrpj&page=1
Say anything you want about Christians, conservative Americans and Sarah Palin’s kids but don’t you even think about saying anything negative about “openly gay” homosexuals. They are now a protected species like the Neo Mexican Meadow Rat.
Am I missing something in the article that says Dr. Eric Walsh was inept or didn’t do a good job as Pasadena’s public health director? Where does it point out that his views on homosexuality were affecting his ability to do the job? It sounds like he was blacklisted for having “inappropriate” views unrelated to his actual ability to do the work!
BTW, this is exactly why I’m so opposed to the homosexualists. Homosexuality is both unnatural and sinful, but that’s not the issue so much as where this homosexual “equality” crap is leading the country. The homosexualists see this as a civil rights battle, so they want to do the same things that were done in the past. We’re talking about using the full weight of government to squash anyone who doesn’t applaud homosexuality!
I’m pretty sure the modern homosexual “rights” movement doesn’t want tolerance. They likely find the concept of tolerance to be insulting, as it implies they’re doing something wrong (normal behavior doesn’t need to be tolerated). No. They want dominance, and that, my FRiend, is un-American and must be fought!
So when is this kind of background check going to be part of everybody's employment search? I suspect interviews will have a question on whether or not you agree with the company's diversity statement/policy. Support for homosexuality is becoming a type of 'mark of the beast'.
Reminiscent of “The Scarlett Letter” whereby now the “A” represents “Anti-gay”.
But there is nothing gay about any of this.
Equal rights is a double standard.
Christians need not apply.
Pray America wakes up
That is the trajectory. Salute the flag of Sodom or you will be denied:
3. Egress in and out of a country
4. Equal rights to speech on the Internet, etc. (read your ISP ToS)
No, just the opposite.
That at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up: And whoso falleth not down and worshippeth shall the same hour be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace. (Daniel 3:5-6)
The litmus test:
“Do you now hold, or have you ever held, traditional beliefs?”
6 Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to him, King Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. 17 If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us[c] from Your Majestys hand. 18 But even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up. (Daniel 3:16-18)
Even more troubling, there’s no limit on how far back the homosexualists appear willing to go to dig up “dirt” on people. If you said or wrote something a decade ago that used less than glowing terms to describe homosexuality, you could be out of a job, too. We don’t call ‘em the HomoStasi for nothing!
BTW, the ostracism is selectively applied. President Obama gets a pass because he’s a leftist (much like accused rapist Clinton got a pass from the feminists). Selective outrage that’s only against one’s political enemies is another Stasi-like technique.
What right do they have not to hire him?
If that’s the litmus test, then many of today’s liberals will have to be forced out of public life.
Obama used to be against homosexual marriage. So did Hillary Clinton. So did Bill Clinton.
In fact, it’s a real eye opener, to go back and see the roll call vote on the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. Many solid liberals voted for that bill. Less than 20 years ago,most liberals were saying that they believed that marriage was a man and a woman.
So why do these liberals get a pass? At one time they opposed a key aspect of the homosexual agenda.
“4. Equal rights to speech on the Internet, etc. (read your ISP ToS)”
That’s an aspect I hadn’t considered, but you’re absolutely right. My ISP reserves the right to terminate service if I post, transmit, or distribute content that is offensive or objectionable per my ISP’s sole discretion. That’s exactly what’s being used to deny people jobs! They’ve said or done something that’s deemed offensive by the homosexualists.
We live in sick times, FRiend, but it’s not like we weren’t warned. I just didn’t think it would happen so fast.
“If thats the litmus test, then many of todays liberals will have to be forced out of public life.”
Read post #14. Leftists get a pass. I’m sure you know about the credible rape accusations against President Clinton. The feminists gave him a pass. Why? Because supported the feminists’ political agenda.
To a leftist, the law is something selectively used to restrain or destroy one’s opponents.
They get a pass for public ally repenting.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Well, Luther would qualify for that.
Purposely ambiguous. I actually called Verizon about that years ago, as "otherwise objectionable" "violative of any law" type terms are so wide that Sox vs. Yankees disputes could be banned, while conservative values are what they have in focus. But they assured me they were not going to do that. As did Hitler.
Sounds like a “religious test” prohibited by the Constitution. He should sue!
“He wouldn’t be able to get EEOC off it’s “Secretary Spread,” but he has an explicit, actionable federal case of illegal discrimination.”
Agreed! We’re dealing here with a government post, not a private corporation, and the Constitution forbids religious tests for public office!
liberals used to say keep your views confined to church. now, its not good enough to bake a wedding cake, and say ‘i am personally opposed to gay marriage.’ gays demand everyone to bend over to them.
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.