Skip to comments.
Children's Home Standing Firm on Biblical Convictions, Firing of Lesbian
Agapy press ^
| November 20, 2001
| By Rusty Pugh and Bill Fancher
Posted on 11/20/2001 6:24:54 AM PST by RMrattlesnake
Children's Home Standing Firm on Biblical Convictions, Firing of Lesbian Kentucky Lawsuit May Have National Implications
By Rusty Pugh and Bill Fancher November 20, 2001
(AgapePress) - A Kentucky agency that cares for abused and abandoned children is refusing to cave in to pressure to cater to the homosexual agenda.
Kentucky Baptist Home for Children says it would rather operate without state subsidies, if receiving state money means sacrificing its religious values. The Home and the State of Kentucky are defendants in a federal lawsuit over the firing of a lesbian employee in 1998. KBHC says having an openly homosexual employee conflicts with its belief that homosexuality is sinful -- but the state funding the agency receives could be eliminated if it refuses to back down.
Patrick Gillen of the Thomas More Law Center says KBHC wants to help abused and abandoned children, and will not sacrifice its values. "To me this is a heartening example of the collaboration between Christians for the purpose of preserving our rights in this larger society to deliver our message to children who need to hear that," he says.
Gillen says the agency should be applauded because they are thinking of the best interest of the children involved -- not the best interest of the politically correct homosexual agenda.
"[Kentucky Baptist Home for Children] has no interest whatsoever in coercing any person to share its religious conviction," Gillen says. "It merely has the best interests of the children at heart, and its judgment [is] that those children should not exposed to this lifestyle at this vulnerable stage in their development."
KBHC President William Smithwick told The Courier-Journal in Louisville his agency prefers to continue cooperating with the state, but that if the courts or the state decides public funds shouldn't go to a religious agency, ''and we think probably one day it will, we may have to break ranks with public funding.'' The agency is planning a national fundraising drive that would allow it to operate without state funding.
The American Civil Liberties Union is representing the plaintiffs in the case over the1998 firing of lesbian counselor Alicia Pedreira. The ACLU contends that state funding amounts to government support of religion.
The Courier-Journal says the lawsuit is being watched nationally as a test case to determine if government support of faith-based social services amounts to public support for religion.
Courageous Army Like the Kentucky Baptist Home for Children, The Salvation Army chose to stand firm on its religious convictions recently when it rescinded its recent acceptance of the concept of providing insurance benefits for "domestic partners" -- a step still being hailed as a courageous about-face. Sandy Rios, president of Concerned Women for America, says the change was brought about by more than just protest from The Army's supporters.
"There is enough of that strong Spirit of God in The Salvation Army that they knew when they had made a mistake," Rios says. "They understood when they heard from people."
Rios says the courage The Salvation Army demonstrated in admitting to a mistake is hard to find in society today. © 2001 AgapePress all rights reserved
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: christianlist; homosexualagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
Hummmmmm, well the gays are doing what ever thay can to take our religous freedoms away.
To: *Christian_list; *Homosexual Agenda
?
2
posted on
11/20/2001 6:26:00 AM PST
by
Khepera
To: RMrattlesnake
Gees, might as well enforce that Jews must use baby sitters members of the KKK.
3
posted on
11/20/2001 6:29:02 AM PST
by
lavaroise
To: RMrattlesnake
Not trying to sound flippant, but I am afraid that this is what happens when a Christian institution accepts government money. They must choose between two masters now. It sounds like they are choosing correctly, but who knows if they are prepared financially to make up the cost when the government pulls its funding?
To: Zack Nguyen
Good piont
To: RMrattlesnake
Shoot, man. They need to have a Ramadan feast after they hire back the lezbo.
Just ask our "evangelical" Prez: We are a nation of "many faiths." (Read: Christians are toast.)
6
posted on
11/20/2001 6:34:26 AM PST
by
BenR2
To: RMrattlesnake
Interesting.
The government forcibly takes money that would normally go to charities (which are largely religious, and usually Christian). By the sole reason that the government has taken the money, though, the ACLU reasons that it can't give it to those organizations which would have received it anyway, had the government not intervened (at the point of a gun, btw).
To: Zack Nguyen
You make a good point, but your point brings up the whole problem of government social services. If Christians believe that children, particularly vulnerable abused children, should not be exposed to the homosexual lifestyle, why do they have to pay taxes that will go towards putting children in these situations? If the government can withdraw its support for religious social service agencies, then Christians should be able to withdraw their financial support from government social services agencies.
WFTR
Mostly afraid of your ignorance (of the 4th Amendment)
Bill
8
posted on
11/20/2001 6:40:34 AM PST
by
WFTR
To: RMrattlesnake
Kentucky Baptist Home for Children says it would rather operate without state subsidies, if receiving state money means sacrificing its religious values. Christian organizations: Read it; Learn it; Live it. If you are doing God's work, He will provide. If you need government subsidies to stay afloat, you might want to get into another line of work.
9
posted on
11/20/2001 6:45:23 AM PST
by
Skooz
To: Zack Nguyen
It sounds like they are choosing correctly, but who knows if they are prepared financially to make up the cost when the government pulls its funding? Well you could always put them on your list of worthy donations. I think we will.
With all the administrative "fumbo jumbo" going on with the big charity names we are looking at one on one donations. Pray about what the Lord would have you do with your money, when these situations come up make a sincere note of them, and follow up.
I am sure this children's home would love to hear from folks like us.
James 1:27
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
To: Skooz
You stated that well.
11
posted on
11/20/2001 6:51:59 AM PST
by
pubmom
To: RMrattlesnake
If you want to support Kentucky Baptist Children's Home, here is their address:
Triad East, Suite 200
10200 Linn Station Rd
Louisville, KY 40223
(502) 245-2101
(800) 456-1386
info@kbhc.org
I'm sure donations and/or email letters of encourage will be greatly appreciated. On their web site -http://www.iglou.com/kbhc/ - you will also find a history of the ACLU suit.
12
posted on
11/20/2001 7:03:27 AM PST
by
Elkiejg
To: RMrattlesnake
Just a little bit of background (and I'll try to keep this as objective as possible). The woman who was fired made no mention of her sexual orientation where she worked and made no effort to make it known. Her sexual orientation only became known to her employer after a photograph of her with her lover taken at a local fair (I believe the Kentucky State Fair) was published in a local publication -- she wasn't even aware that she was being photographed for such a purpose (and before anyone starts with a snide remark, it was a perfectly normal outdoor shot with nothing "icky" going on). I believe that she wore a T-shirt that had some words regarding her sexual orientation, but it was completely outside of the workplace.
I hope I don't come off as sounding judgemental of either side; those are the facts. When the photograph was published and someone at her place of employment saw it she was terminated. Until then her sexual orientation was not known to anyone and she made no effort to share the details of her private life. (I only mention this because some people comment on how homosexuals "flaunt their lifestyle"). I'll not comment on whether her employer was in the right in terminating her (though I personally believe that organizations who make such arbitrary employment decisions should not accept government funding).
13
posted on
11/20/2001 7:27:34 AM PST
by
Dimensio
To: Dimensio
Here's the thing about the tee shirt ----what does it say about a person who wears a "walking billboard" telling everyone about her "private" sexual practices?
14
posted on
11/20/2001 7:52:56 AM PST
by
hexpoppy
To: BenR2
Just ask our "evangelical" Prez: We are a nation of "many faiths." (Read: Christians are toast.) I don't read it that way at all. The US has always been a nation of many faiths, if not always including Muslims. As for the Ramadan dinner at the White House, I call that excellent diplomacy to buy time. Whether this is consistent with being "evangelical", I won't comment because I'm not one myself.
15
posted on
11/20/2001 7:53:45 AM PST
by
Salman
To: RMrattlesnake
Gay rights. Its for "the children."
16
posted on
11/20/2001 7:54:55 AM PST
by
Clemenza
To: BenR2
If we are not "a nation of many faiths," then we are no better than the Islamist countries, where "many faiths" are not allowed.
To: hexpoppy
Here's the thing about the tee shirt ----what does it say about a person who wears a "walking billboard" telling everyone about her "private" sexual practices?
I dunno. What does it say when a person walks around in public with their children with them? We all know where those children came from!
Anyway, I don't recall all of the details ATM -- she may have just been with her lover and identified by caption (I'll try to find a reference).
18
posted on
11/20/2001 7:57:59 AM PST
by
Dimensio
To: Dimensio
The analogy you used with children is as lame as it can be. Children aren't "paraded" around as a demonstration that two people have had heterosexual relations. The advertisements we wear on our bodies, good or bad, are.
To: Dimensio
As a lesbian (whether open or not) she must be considered as a molestation threat to the children.
I consider mental exposure to deviant sexual practices to be as harmful as the act of physical molestation.
Since the beliefs of this organization are that the practice of homosexual behavior is an abomination, then they shouldn't be forced to allow a person practicing homosexuality to come into contact with children in their care.
God Save America (Please)
20
posted on
11/20/2001 10:00:38 AM PST
by
John O
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson