A group of Southern Baptists are lining up behind a resolution condemning the California school system for what they claim is a recent “tolerance” campaign that blatantly endorses homosexuality.
The resolution, authored by Dr. Voddie Baucham, Jr., a preacher and lecturer in the Southern Baptist denomination, and Bruce N. Shortt, author of The Harsh Truth About Public Schools, is a response to the recent enactment of California Senate Bill 777.
Baucham and Shortt claim that SB 777 indoctrinates students “to believe that the homosexual, bisexual, and other sexually deviant lifestyles are normal, acceptable, and the moral equivalent of biblical heterosexuality.”
“[W]hen these schools can hide behind stealth phrases like tolerance, safe schools, multiculturalism, and safer sex, parents are often unaware of the dangers lurking beneath the surface,” Baucham said in a statement.
“This resolution is an effort to shine the light of truth in the dark corners of our schools and force our brethren to take a long, hard, honest look at what we have tolerated for far too long,” he added.
In their resolution, Baucham and Shortt call for California parents to withdraw their children from public schools while pursuing safe Christian alternatives to education such as homeschooling. The resolution also urges local churches to unite against and inform their communities of the harmful effects of SB 777 while praying for the salvation of “all homosexuals and other sexual deviants from their sexual sin.”
"Homosexuals and others trapped in sexual sin need our prayers and concern, but Christian parents must make sure that their children are not being endangered by false teaching in government schools,” Shortt explained.
"Unfortunately, most of our churches and other Christian organizations have refused to acknowledge that children in government schools are being inundated by a cascading torrent of spiritual and moral pathologies,” Shortt added, emphasizing the importance of the resolution.
Baucham and Shortt have submitted their resolution for review at the Southern Baptist Convention’s (SBC) 2008 Annual Meeting, which will be held June 10-11 in Indianapolis.
RSS
"something Jesus and his followers never did"
Peter was married (to a woman). Read the Bible!
bmore, your standing on pretty shaky ground to use the logic that because Jesus did not address homosexuality He must believe there is nothing wrong with it even though God in both the Old and New Testament alike condemns the sexual practices of homosexuality and calls it both an abomination and sin.
That speaks to a man marrying a woman, something Jesus and his followers never did, so he is not making that law of the land. That does not tie into homosexuality, stretch it as much as you want.
ifeelfine, my apology for misreading your first post and I agree with you 100% that God condemns heterosexual practices outside of marriage, but He also condemns all homosexual practices period. I'm talking about sexual behavior when I use the word practices.
"If it were that important of an issue, wouldn't Jesus have said something about it while he was on Earth?"
Bemore...He did in Matthew 19 starting in vs. 4 "...Have you not read, that He who reated them from the beginning made them male and female, and said 'For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother , and shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?"
Seems quite clear to me what his definition of marriage was. Man + woman = marriage.
ifeelfine, if bmore is in a relationship that is totally void of sexual thoughts, desires, or behavior it's called a friendship regardless of if it's with somebody of the same or opposite sex. It makes me sick that so many people assume because two people of the same sex live together or have a very strong and close friendship they must be homosexuals or even if it's with somebody of the opposite sex they must be having sex.
believer: You're specifically talking about same-sex loving relationships though, Bmore is in one so is he sinning? I would contend he is not.
ifeelfine, is that not what I said to bmore that God condemns the sexual practices plus if you will read 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Romans 1:27 you will see in the New Testament that God does indeed condemn as a minimum the sexual practices of homosexuality along with other sexual sins.
believer: God doesn't condemn homosexuality, He condemns certain acts in certain situations - certainly He didn't / doesn't condemn loving homosexual relationships. I can't find a single passage saying loving homosexual relationships are bad - can you? All I can find are some passages on temple pagan sex rituals and a couple of passages having more to do with violence and domination than sexual gratification.
ifeelfine, I don't know what Bible you read but in every reliable Bible translation God condemns the practice of homosexuality as stated in both the Old and New Testament and as usual you missed the point. bmore stated that since Christ did not speak to homosexuality He condoned it and my point was He did not speak to a number of issues but that does not mean He either condoned it or condemned it and I used the fact that He did not speak to the practice of perverts molesting toddlers and yet He certainly would not condone it. Or maybe in your Bible He would condone it?
believer: No where in the Bible does it speak to pedophelia - in fact in many spots it endorses what we would now consider underage marriage.
How many times must it be said, God does not condemn gay sex practices anymore than He condemns heterosexual sex practices - in fact He condemns them in exactly the same way.
bmore, I think your definition of homosexuality is different than many of those responding to this issue. I can't speak for nor do I intend to speak for anybody else, but I believe that the majority of those responding are speaking to the sexual practices of homosexuality only and these are the pracices that God condemns in both the Old and New Testament. Lastly, just because Christ did not speak to an issue does not mean He either condoned it or condemned it, He just did not speak to it. He did not speak to the issue of pedophilia, but certainly you would not say that as a result He condoned it.
flagged myself
bmore, the Bible, God's Word, teaches that all of us are sinners as are result everyone of us sins, kinds of sin come in a wide variety from the little white lie all the way to mass murder and although some sins have a much harsher consequences from a human perspective in God's eyes it's all sin and He hates all sin. And yet while we are all sinners does not mean that all of us are living in sin. To be living in sin means that one has adopted a lifestyle of either constantly practicing one sin or any sins that suits their fancy and they show little if any remorse or regret and have no desire to stop or change their behavior. A what ever feels good do it mindset regardless of what others say or think to include God. God has given each of a free will and we can either choose to live in sin or repent and turn to Him and not only be saved but also get the help and the desire we need to stop living in sin.
Men who wrote the Bible are opposed to homosexuality. If it were that important of an issue, wouldn't Jesus have said something about it while he was on Earth? Instead, he focused on loving one another. He touched on sexual immorality with prostitution, but that is a lack of love for one's body. The love I have for my partner is pure and committed, no evil is coming from it. The belief of the Catholic Church is that one does not have control over their sexual orientation, yet they should not act on it. The belief I am getting from many on this website is that homosexuality is completely sin, whether you are having sex with a man or not. How could an all powerful God allow Satan to overpower him and make someone who he created in his image and likeness full of sin. If you consider homosexuality a sin, then you believe somoene is living in sin as opposed to just saying God d*** it once. How could God let Satan overpower him and turn someone away?
bmore, you're 100% correct we should not make decisions simply based on the majority view, the children of Israel got stuck in the wilderness for forty years because they listened to the majority as opposed to listening to God in this case God is opposed to homosexual practices so therefore we need to oppose homosexual marriages for that reason as well.
I am in no way (nor did I ever) say the battle for gay rights is exactly the same as that for black/white equality. My point is that people are saying gay marriage is wrong because the majority is against it, but the majority is not always right, as shown in the instances I brought up below. Also, the Bible has been used to oppress groups (such as those wishing to marry another race) just as it is now being used to oppress gays.
Bmore,
Back then, African Americans got enslaved, beaten, hosed down, had to use different bathrooms, water fountains, had to sit in the back of the bus, go to rundown schools, have horrible income, and practically got the military on their backs.
How is the battle for homosexual rights similar in America? Comment please o_o
And I flagged myself cause I said something stupid o.o
We have a government for the people, by the people, but a large part of that government is checks and balances. If the will of the majority always took precedence, we'd still have slavery, segregated schools, and interracial marriage would be illegal. All of these things were decided upon despite the will of the people, and it was to help the minority despite the majority's wishes. My apologies your will isn't going to happen this time.
aliveinchrist97,
"Sadly enough this is no longer a country for the people and by the people........."
We have experienced a set back mainly because Christians have been silent. In a 'government for the people by the people' the people have a duty to God & country to stay involved for the sake of Judeo-Christian values, think of it as a mission or ministry. Its not to late to save our country we still have a Constitution and Bill of Rights that protects us, but these people that say they don't like politics so they ignore it, invite evil in, evil does not like the biblical values our country was founded on.
Sadly enough this is no longer a country for the people and by the people.........a judge can say that we don't know what we want or what is best for us.......and pass it right along........we as christians cannot and will not shy from calling sin what it is - "SIN". There is no gray area.....it is either for God or against God. God does not tolerate sin and He does not make excuses for it and neither should we! He will not be mocked.......it is going to get harder and more difficult to be a christian in these united states.........but we have God and will not fear what others fear. We will stand up and prevail........Amen. I say keep on keepin on and I am glad that there are people who will stand for what is right in God's eyes:) When we turn away from God what rights do we have? one who is not in Christ is dead in their sin.............we need to be bold in the Word and not back down from it!
Thank God someone is willing to stand up for what is right.
"Slacker, The people of Calif. have voted twice to affirm marriage is between one man and one woman. This is judicial activeism, I think they think they are in Cuba. America is a government for the people by the people, we have the power we just need to make ourselves heard. Christians find your voices! "
I agree, the people of california can say to these activist judges that they do know how to decide for themselves what is right by passing their constitutional amendment defining marriage between a man and a woman...
sorry my post was not about this article. sigh
Slacker, The people of Calif. have voted twice to affirm marriage is between one man and one woman. This is judicial activeism, I think they think they are in Cuba. America is a government for the people by the people, we have the power we just need to make ourselves heard. Christians find your voices!
There is a difference between "tolerance" and "Acceptance". What this california house bill is looking to do is to force everyone to accept homosexuality as normal. This isn't tolerance at all it is forcing people to accept something as normal behavior that they cannot do. I tolerate homosexuality because i have to, I do not accept it tho, there is a difference. Maybe the people of california should stand up and in one voice say we will not accept this as normal...
I thank God that when I went to public school back in the 50's and 60's we didn't have to deal with homosexuality. We didn't even really know what it was. Never was there any need for sex education. In my high school there was only one unwed mother per year. These women were required to drop out of school along with their partner, and they did so in shame. They married their partner and most finished high school at night.
Now now... homosexuals have rights too... so don't go and Klan them or anything *looks at protestants* it is fine to teach tolerance... ok... but these schools are going pro-gay... that is wrong... if schools are expected not to encourage religion, they should be expected not to encourage homosexuality either.
Now it shows up!
Now it shows up!
My post got lost in cyberspace....let's try again...
ifeelfine72, the problem here is the intolerance being taught in the name of tolerance. Tolerance in this case is "sympothy or indlulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with on's own". They are not teaching tolerance but rather using state money to teach intolerance of Biblical morality as clearly stated in Romans chapter 1.
It is nothing but hypocracy on the part of the public schools and the homosexual community to allow this. It is teaching the 'gay morality' against Biblical morality. In doing so the schools are violating the Constitutional rights of children and parents to believe what the Bible teaches. It is going against parental authority to raise their children in the ways of the Bible.
If it's wrong to teach Biblical morality then it is wrong to teach against it.
ifeelfine72, it's not tolerance they are teaching the children...it's compromise and that Biblical morality is wrong. It is using state money to teach hate of Christian morals and Biblical beliefs.
Tolerance in this case is "a sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with on's own". What they are teaching is intolerance for anyone who sides with the Bible that homosexuality is wrong (unapproved, against nature to be exact). You will find Romans chaper 1 very clear on God's point of view on this subject.
It is nothing but hypocracy on the part of the schools to allow this without teaching all views of the issue. They are teaching contrary morals to children protected by the freedom of religion to believe the Bible.
i really hate evil
Thank you Baptist Church for standing up against these wolves in sheeps clothing!
I ecourage all Christians to stand against this type of indoctrination. For the past 15 years in California the only groups who have stood against teaching about homosexuality in schools, promoting the gay agenday, giving children contraception, giving children access to abortions without the parents consent has been the Catholic Church, Assemblies of God, Baptists and various evangelicals.
This weight is too much for only us to have to bear it. All Christian denominations should stand with us against this perversion.
DiaryofCross,
Not to worry about don, if it is anything like his previous posts you haven't missed anything.
Umm....what did Don say? Cause this flagging business has me wondering...
The Bible speaks of the spirit of anti-Christ paving the way for the anti-Christ himself. For those who don't know...Christ was not Jesus' last name.... Christ was the title of the person who would save us from our sins (including an immoral nature). The spirit of anti-Christ is against every and anything Christ or Christ-like.
As the anti-Christ attitude prevails (which will have to happen for the anti-Christ himself to enter history) all Biblical morality will be 'demonized' as intolerant, hateful, prejudicial, ect. Where better for the spirit of anti-Christ to indoctrinate society? This is why it is so important for students to know what they believe and stand for their faith in the public schools.
I think it needs to be clarified that this resolution is within the walls of the church. There is no request for legislation, or public action. This is simply a resolution to exercise ot freedom to decide for ourselves, as Christians, that we are not required to be a part of "Soddom and Gommorha". I honestly think it would be a pretty powerful statement if a majority of born-again Christians stood for what the Word of God says and withdrew their children from the CA public schools. What would it say if the private Christian schools had more students then the public school systems? As the old clichhe goes, actions speak louder than words.
As Christians, we are certainly not dictating to others how they want to live, but if you are trying to force us to learn doctrine that flies contrary to what scripture says, then we have every right to reject that and school our children our way, just as you do yours.
Adding to my argument! I can't believe I didn't make this clear o_o
When I say privileges, I mean the ones that relate to the sin. Firing a homosexual "just because" or revoking a car or things that do not relate to his sexuality is overkill. o_o
To other Christians believing in the equality of homosexuality and that it’s right and natural, I would have to say that decision belongs solely to God because we are not a man-made religion (I don’t even like calling Christianity a religion, but I can’t think of any other word for it D: ) which he revealed in the Scripture. If we were, then yes, we have the ability to change Christianity if we want to, but we don’t have the authority to do so and we trust that the Lord will not change or add anything that contradicts what he said before because we know Him to be consistent, even if we’re not. Also, Lord Jesus came down and sacrificed himself so that by grace we can be saved and then bear witness to his saving grace, not to continue sins, but to be freely blameless. I had to add that in :D
So, what are our hate crimes? I have to ask because I just see us being the loud and obnoxious Christians as we are and feel free to argue my points as long as you don’t mind me being obnoxiously stubborn XD
And I learned that I was a literalist for saying that the Bible was the inherent Word of God. I never knew there was such a name till I came to this news site! I digress ._.
And that's it.
Well, I'm mad at myself. I backspaced myself, causing my browser to go to the last page I visited and lost all my work on the post. A lesson learned. Open Microsoft Word people! Open it! D: And now I have to break down my post cause it’s pushing the 3k mark XD hope ya’ll don’t mind it ^^
You are correct, I am against homosexuality because I know it to be a sin (do you smell a debate on the morality of homosexuality? XD) Though I see your point that one of a Christian’s right to being a newly-born Christian is conversion and reaching out, but now that’s being limited to Christians not defining as homosexuality as a sin and being intolerant of it as well. To me, intolerance is sending hate mail, burning somebody’s house down, bullying, and preventing someone from hiring, etc…etc…When someone sins in a certain area, such as lying or cheating, it’s logical to not give them certain privileges unless they’re trustworthy enough to handle it. In homosexuality, marriage and management of a family isn’t a privilege to be given because marriage is not only defined as union between a man and a woman, but a three cornerstone love of Agape, Filia, and Eros. Though I don’t pretend to be a knowledge nut of different languages, but I believe agape is the sacrificial love, filia the friendship love, and eros the sensual love. Agape and Filia themselves are defined as a good friendship, them being the core foundation of any marriage. I can’t believe love is a sensual pleasure attraction first since anything could happen and this blindness could lead to anything being game, but when a love is based on sacrifice and friendship, then the sensual only strengthens this resolve. I’m not sure where this theory’s been based, but this has been proved by the Bible and of course all marriages can succeed by the knowledge and wisdom by God, so I’m not ushering any cult here (o.o). I only heard of homosexuals being sexually attracted first, do you say otherwise? Because this also goes for the hetero- as well that marriage found on the sensual is a poor start to a marriage, though this could be argued that the straight get to marry regardless, so onto another part of my argument. There is nothing wrong with the agape and filia part of their relationship, but what makes them homosexuals is the eros. There have been consequences with sexual sin such as AIDS and I have heard of homosexuals having such diseases so not having a child is the least of the concerns. Now this could be a small percentage of homosexuals, however my point is it has been done before and there is a known consequence. And I’ll state that the straight can also get these diseases as well due to prostitution, being forced, or just plain didn’t warn or know (lack of accountability). However despite this consequence, does the homosexual eros result in any good?
Isa 5:20 "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! "
Yes - the prevailing wisdom is complete intolerance for any objective definition of morality or truth.
none taken, i have a very proud ethnic and religious background. when u say "I don't know if "shoving down" is the legit phrase, but what I'm asking is how are we forcing the non-believers to our side?"
being a believer and a nonbeliever has absolutely nothing to do with this topic. to say 'your side' is, im assuming, against homosexuality and for this campaign, not necessarily conversion to christianity. some non-christians don't believe in homosexuality, and even so, not all christians believe that homosexuality is wrong: or as these people put it "IMMORAL, DANGEROUS, DEVIANT, SINFUL." some proud christians believe in equality, and that God loves all his children, regardless of, like -race, ethnicity, sex- sexual orientation. these proud christians will not be persuaded by fear-invoking preachers to not support tolerance campaigns. but alas, conservative christians - such as these people - feel the need to continue the campaign of hate and INtolerance.
hmmm..
"tolerance"
"pro-choice"
'diversity"
Sounds to me like quite a few folks either didn't read Orwell's "1984" in high school - or just didn't get it.
Today's prevailing rhetoric is eerily reminiscent of "Newspeak".
I'm also wondering how you came to the conclusion that we're "shoving our lifestyles" down people's throats. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but we have tried, the same as the other side (in the bounds of legality) shape the country for the better, as many non-believers would try to do in their mindset. We, as Christians, think the government is trying to shove down homosexuality down our throats even if they think they're doing it for the common good. I don't know if "shoving down" is the legit phrase, but what I'm asking is how are we forcing the non-believers to our side?
Oh and no offense taken :D
Blue,
What if that tolerance campaign becomes a reversal to be intolerant towards Christian views?
this is why society and courts are starting to turn against these radical christian groups. I mean no offence, but this absurb behavior against a TOLERANCE campaign shows the lengths that conservative christians will go to shove THEIR lifestyles down OUR throats. so when people claim that homosexuality is being forced on america, RIGHT BACK AT YOU.
Article: “[W]hen these schools can hide behind stealth phrases…” [End quote]
They mix their sweet drink with the fermented vomit of that old serpent and then shout from the darkness, “Drink children!” A dark agenda it is, orchestrated by the puppet master of sin himself, Satan. The goal, raise up a drunken and mighty generation that staggers in the night, calling evil good and good evil.
Parents awake, and guard your children! Watch, pray, and provide a continuous environment for your child that is filled with the holiness of God, His power, His presence, and His infallible word.
There is a problem here - it is a false concept by many about sin and what that means.
As Christians, we are never called to invoke a punishment on sin, just to separate it from ourselves. That may mean keeping a distance from the sinner while they engage in that sin, but it does not mean we should try and stop the sinner from doing the sin (unless it is hurting someone else - such as trying to kill someone, etc.)
In this sense, the legal actions against homosexual behavior may have been excessive - same as the other laws attempting to regulate personal, private behavior. In reaction, though, the attempt is to make these behavioral choices protected, and this protection extends even to criticism of the behavior and to indoctrination that the behavior is acceptable in order to diminish percieved intolerance.
Welcome to the last days.
Let us pray for the lost.
Ifeelfine
Well, my point is why must we learn that homosexual is right and natural? If the issue is hate crimes and such, why isn't it enough to just teach children that it's wrong to use underminded attacks such as hate mail, property damage, bullying, and other such abuses? Why must a lifestyle be first viewed as 'natural' in order to curb assaults?
It's about time that someone call these folks on the carpet for what they are trying to do under cloak of euphemism.
Even better, if Christian and likeminded families homeschooled or private schooled thier kids instead of submitting to this governmental indoctrination.
You sure can't mention anything having to do with faith or religion in public schools any more - unless of course you're speaking about the anti-religion of secularism and hedonism. The virtues of those are praised, extolled and taught as the highest "good".
What exactly has the current administration done that is treasonous? Is it anything like giving secrets to China, oops, sorry that was Clinton.
JC: You have a very odd definition of treason apperently. You haven't made one negative comment about the current executive branch administration of the US and all of their arguably treasonous activities and yet teaching children tolerance is treason?
Diary: I'm not sure what you're getting at. Please explain. Thanks.
Here's a question:
If homosexuals are worried about intolerance and hate crimes, why isn't any effort being made to put in basic morals such as love your neighbor or thou shalt not murder? Why must we learn that homosexual is natural in order to prevent hate crimes? I'm completely confused on this. After slavery and other sort of hate crimes, we learn NOT to do that against our fellow humans. Why must we learn that homosexualism is natural? Comments? o.o
"It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin." (Luke 17:2)
"And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck." (Mark 9:42)
---------------
California is committing treason against the rest of the union. They suppress the people's vote for their own agenda. In California, the people no longer have any say. This is extremely unconstitutional and goes against what this country was founded upon.
In my opinion, the U.S. Senate can only do one of two things in this case:
1. Remove the current government and return the government back to the people of California.
2. Dissolve the union with California.
A state in this union cannot, by law, ignore the people's will. Yet California has and continues to do so.
People, right now the only ones making noise are the miniscule amount of people in these activist groups. We far outweigh those, yet we remain silent. Except in California, where they spoke, but were overruled. If we don't say anything, then we're next.
Write to Congress, get the word to them that we won't stand for this. Maybe, just maybe, if we make enough noise, they'll begin to listen. Maybe.