Skip to comments.Homosexual Behavior Policy Leads To Denial Of Christian University Law School Accreditation
Posted on 06/16/2014 7:07:47 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Lawyers from the Law Society of British Columbia voted to prevent the British Columbia Trinity Western University from conferring law degrees due to the school's Community Covenant Agreement which requires that students "voluntarily abstain" from "sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman."
According to the National Post, despite early results which suggested an overwhelmingly victory of 3210 to 968, the decision is not binding and only expresses the sentiments of those in the Law Society.
Thirty-one benchers are still responsible for offering the final verdict on the law school, which is set to open in 2016.
TWU President Bob Kuhn, J.D. argued in a statement that "difficult decisions involving fundamental rights and freedoms should not be decided by popular opinion."
"In April, the LSBC Benchers made their decision, in a 20 to 7 vote, after the thoughtful and measured expression of views and careful consideration of reports and submissions, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in 2001 SCC 31. The thorough process taken by the LSBC should not be undermined by a vocal group that organizes a special general meeting," Kuhm summarized.
Kuhn added that "in a free and democratic society, the faith of TWU graduates cannot preclude them from practicing law. A just society protects the rights of religious minorities."
Attorneys speaking on Thursday had other interpretations.
"If you asked me to choose between law school and my spouse, I would have to choose my spouse it's discriminatory, that's all there is to it," one lawyer who identified himself as Nick Bower, told the crowd.
Another attorney told the crowd, "You impose your own view of discrimination, and that's not the law and I thought we were all lawyers."
The Benchers in the April decision had noted that their decision stemmed out of respecting "the Rule of Law," and cited a 2001 Canadian Supreme Court decision which, on the basis of "freedom of conscience and religion," had allowed TWU to ban its staff, faculty and student body from being in gay relationships.
According to TWU, "The resolution is not binding on the Benchers and does not legally compel them reverse the April decision. If the resolution has not been implemented within the following year, and the executive director receives another petition signed by at least five per cent of LSBC members, a referendum on the resolution must then be conducted. Even that cannot compel the Benchers to disregard their statutory duties."
It will also lead to the closing of any church in the U.S. that won’t perform ‘gay marriages.’
Tax exempt status will be revoked unless ‘legally recognized marriages’ are performed.
This was done with interracial marriages and the same will happen to ALL churches here.
Follow the Bible or close your doors. Pick one.
So give up tax exempt status. It is going away anyhow. A numbwr of churches function without tax exempt status. It requires one to be really aware of what is important.
RE: It will also lead to the closing of any church in the U.S. that wont perform gay marriages.
The bellwhether for that will first be the MILITARY.
If Chaplains are FORCED to perform gay marriages, that would be the first step towards what you just said above.
I’m with you, Chickensoup. If the government says accept openly practicing, non-repentant homosexuals or lose tax exempt status, I’m sure my church would immediately vote to give up the latter. It’s not even a close choice. We’ll survive just fine, maybe even better once the moral battle lines are drawn more clearly.
religious bigotry against Christianity is in vogipue, dontcha know
What part of forming a social contract do these lawyers not understand? There were two parties agreeing to this and neither was coerced into it. No one is forced to go to school there and if they don’t like the conditions, go somewhere else.
I hope the anti-Christian bigotry comes into the open in full on frontal assault and that Christians finally being living the life of Christ and not the American dream.
It’s only going to make the church explode when the persecution really begins. People will no longer be able to sit back and do nothing. Having to choose between the faith of our fathers, and two guys having anal sex is going to be an interesting thing to view.
I’ll take the anus and a side of herpes .or
I’ll eat His flesh and drink HIs blood and rise on the last day ..
I’ll choose Jesus
Support for homosexual marriage is the Mark of the Beast.
Government has corrupted the term marriage to mean something it doesn't and never has before. Until we change it back legislatively (by simply limiting courts' jurisdiction in this area) we are bound to be burdened by this purposeful, largely court-driven misinterpretation.
Expect that Governments will continue to issue "marriage licenses" to just about anyone. Civilly, however, unless it has a "license" to go with it Government doesn't have to recognize the marriage (e.g., at present a 50 year old man could not obtain a license to marry a 2 year old girl, or maybe even his favorite goat, and have the government recognize it for civil purposes.)
A church wedding is a service where a commitment by an adult heterosexual couple to each other is pledged before God.
Churches that perform only services of "holy matrimony" will hold services for couples as only God defines "holy matrimony." Like "holy communion" this can be done as a church governed function exclusively since the Government can define nothing that is "holy" without offending their invented notion of separation of church and state.
I am serious about this. Beat them at their own game.
Just curious as to how I can use this as repudiation for liberal Christians? Any Bible refs?
It has become clear that anyone who publicly refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of homosexual marriage will be fired from his job or otherwise be incapable of making a living that this issue is a crossroad where people can or must make a choice of whether to follow the narrow road to Christ or the broad path that leads to destruction.
Hence in a symbolic way, or perhaps a literal way caving in on this issue and refusing to stake out a position of moral and biblical clarity in order to please the world is equivalent to taking the Mark of the Beast upon your forehead.
If you speak out against it, you may be fired from your job or your business will be sued into bankruptcy. However if you accept it, then you are accepting as holy that which God has clearly defined as an abomination.
There is a choice to be made. Take the Mark and gain the respect of the world, or refuse the Mark and suffer persecution.
That is why I equate this issue with the Mark of the Beast. You can’t have the Mark of Christ if you have taken the Mark of the Beast. This issue divides the wheat from the tares. It divides the sheep from the wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Man worshipping man. One can make a case for it, P-Marlowe. Good catch.
“Can neither buy nor sell without the mark.” Those who refuse are killed rather than held down and tattooed, so it has to be some choice. The forehead or hand are giving one’s mind to the beast and giving one’s labor to the beast.
Almost as if the Apostle John had read the Apostle Paul’s Romans 1
22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
Just to be clear, are you trying to equate interracial marriage with same-sex "marriage"?
No, I am not equating the two.
I am saying LEFTIST ACTIVIST JUDGES will precisely equate same sex marriage with interracial marriage and the U.S. will pull the tax exempt status of any church that refuses to perform them.
That will happen within the next decade, possibly two decades. But it WILL happen.