Posted on 05/19/2012 7:57:24 PM PDT by Morgana
A historic Christian university in Rome, Georgia has received record resignation letters from staffers after mandating that its employees sign a “personal lifestyle statement.” Reports indicate that nearly sixty out of the two hundred employees at Shorter University have decided to leave the educational institution rather than sign the statement, which outlines a moral code that staff are required to live by.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanvisionnews.com ...
From the looks of the statement, it would have been a mix of people. Some believing in libertine standards for homosexuals, but others who saw nothing wrong with WWJD vis a vis drinking.
Notre Dame and Georgetown — are you listening?
It’s fine for them to force us to perform abortions in our hospitals and provide teens with morning after drugs without parental notification, birth control free for all... I suspect the school.knew what the outcome would be and set the plan in motion! Good for them!!!
I guess Shorter is now shorter.
Just sign it and pretend you’re living by those moral codes. I bet the smarter ones did that
Can’t work here if you want to have wine with your dinner at a restaurant.
I don’t think “prohibits the promotion of alcohol” really jives with your interpretation. Surely Jesus wouldn’t promote alcohol
There are some things you might do, but you might not encourage others to do. That would be very reasonable.
There is also some question whether the wine in Bible times was like the strong, long-aged, highly alcoholic wine of today. Not many years ago, they had “childrens beer” which was barely alcoholic by todays standards. A couple of glasses of today’s wine and a 170lb person who is not used to it can be borderline drunk. I’m not convinced the wine back then was the same
Certainly we know the Bible is against being drunk, and the NT singles out “drunkards” for not entering into the Kingdom of Heaven. But where is the “drunk” line? I’m not sure I know! I know it when I see it! But finding that line is really hard I think. For me, a couple of beers and I’m not in the kind of control I would like to be.
That’s not what the article says. See post #10.
Shorter has always been an old-fashioned Baptist school, with everything that implies - the news media is being a bit disingenuous here (I'm shocked! I tell you! Shocked!), because the agreement also bans adultery, fornication, drinking anywhere but in private, and a bunch of other stuff that old-fashioned Southern Baptists frown upon. If you want to live la vida loca, Shorter is just not where it's at.
They have always had a good music program. My paternal grandmother was Class of '12 in Opera Performance. Sang at the Met, then came home, got married (to another singer), and was a church soloist for years at St. Peter's (the Episcopalians bagged the name before the Catholics got to town). Dad's earliest memory is sitting between his parents in the choir.
I can see half a point in the policy. Jesus partook more freely and openly of the fermented blood of the grape (any other kind would not have been practicable except for a few weeks out of the year) than these people would have their staff do. If you’ve got a significant ministry to alcoholic people, this kind of restraint makes sense. No need that an activity not explicitly banned by the faith should be allowed to act as a stumbling block to the weak. But just to be doing it to say you’re specially clean... pfah, bs, baloney. Anyhow, how common is it to recognize someone in a restaurant? I’d feel a policy that you should never be obviously drunk (for an objective measure, too drunk to legally drive, even if you don’t drive or are a passenger) in public, and should avoid distilled liquors in public, would make more sense. And that when ministering to alcoholics, you should stay totally dry.
The word got out that Jesus was allegedly a glutton and a “winebibber.” Notorious enough? Simple biological processes stop wine fermentation at about 14% which is what typical Jewish wines like Mogen David are. We’re not talking about strait laced Christianized Europeans here. We’re talking about Jews who in spite of minute legalistic moralizing still had a jolly side as their take on the scriptures practically made wine an obligation.
Look up the praise given to the wine Jesus made at the wedding.
Either you have faith or you do not.
If you don’t do not say you do.
At least these people have the courage of their convictions.
Unusual for Liberals.
“I’d feel a policy that you should never be obviously drunk (for an objective measure, too drunk to legally drive, even if you don’t drive or are a passenger) in public, and should avoid distilled liquors in public, would make more sense”
I can agree with that. Also though, I try and be very tolerant of positions more conservative of my own. The political spectrum is like the air temperature. The temperature of air molecules is distributed on a bell curve. Some are 100s of degrees. This is observed in Brownian motion. But on average, the temperature is good. If you continually cut out the high energy ones because they are too hot, the temperature just goes more and more to the left.
It’s like the political left. Most of them don’t want babies killed after they’re born. But they tolerate stuff like that being out there, as it makes us fight them WAY inside their comfort zone. Even if we win that, they still have pretty much everything they want.
“The word got out that Jesus was allegedly a glutton and a “winebibber.””
That’s what Jesus’ enemies said of him, wrongly.
It says it was the best. Not the most alcoholic.
Their lack of ethics led them to take an ethical stand.
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.