Augusta State University to counseling student: change your beliefs or get out

[WaltM]

Of course I do. Just because I don't read the bible doesn't mean I don't respect Christians. But she isn't just a Christian, she is a bigot. There is a difference. This debate isn't about religion, it's about hate speech and delusions concerning homosexuality. The public institution is concerned that those beliefs can interfere with counseling. I think it's a valid concern. They aren't kicking her out; they are asking her to get to know homosexuals a bit better. That will make her better at her job.

so to make it short, you don't deny there are ignorant gay bigots, and that it's equally unacceptable if there are close minded gays who can be hurtful to Christians, and unfit to be counselors. Fair?

[reillym]

Would the same be fair if a gay person is asked to have respect for bigoted Christians in order to complete his degree? you don't deny there are gay bigots, gay idiots, do you?

I dont deny that at all. She is being asked to complete extra "studies" to ensure that she will be a suitable counselor. I would expect ANY institution to do this to ANYBODY who exhibits behavior that could be problematic. It is the job of the institution to create well educated, broad minded people for society.

[reillym]

so to make it short, you don't deny there are ignorant gay bigots, and that it's equally unacceptable if there are close minded gays who can be hurtful to Christians, and unfit to be counselors. Fair?

Sure. Being a counselor demands an open mind, I think. But I'm no expert. Close mindedness is not unique to religion; religion simply advertises it openly.

[jmdrake]

Those were my first thoughts.. Maybe she should go get her master's degree in counseling from a Christian school.

Dannno, did you miss this part of the article?

Keeton, 24, is pursuing her master’s degree in counseling at Augusta State. After her professors learned of her biblical beliefs, specifically her views on homosexual conduct, from both classroom discussions and private conversations with other students, the school imposed the re-education plan. Keeton never denigrated anyone in communicating her beliefs but merely stated factually what they were in appropriate contexts.

It's a sad day when "libertarians" agree with "re-education plans". The APA has backed away from its earlier stance that homosexuality is genetic. If that's the case then how is this lady being bigoted? Homosexuality is a lifestyle. Some agree with it, some do not. If anything this article makes the case that no state support of education should exist on any level.

And what about children who's sexuality gets screwed up from being molested? Who do they go to for help in your world?

[jmdrake]

Well, exactly. It's a touchy subject.



Well, that's the flip side. It could potentially go both ways. However, US law forbids discrimination against gays, so supporting a potential anti-gay counselor could cause problems.

The big question is: should religion take precedence over anti-discrimination laws? She claims her beliefs are religious. Those beliefs are inherently discriminatory and hateful. Should a public university support that kind of thinking in a setting where her beliefs could potentially harm others? Should tax dollars go to supporting a student who will *not* follow what is normally considered open-mindedness and care? A job as a counselor is to comfort others, regardless of belief. Is this woman able to do that? How would she react to counseling two gay women who are having relationship trouble? She need to act in a manner that is NOT based on her religion. Which is very difficult to do sometimes.

Also, the college should have had this in their laws prior to this incident.

What U.S. law forbids discrimination against gays? Please cite. Gays are not considered a "discreet insular minority" under the law. If they were then "Don't ask, don't tell" wouldn't be legal. I'm not saying DADT is the right law, but it couldn't exist if discrimination against gays was actually barred by U.S. law. Actually there are some state laws that go much further in barring discrimination against gays than federal law. Maybe that's what you're talking about. And what's with this acceptance of thought crimes? We're really going to endorse a 1984 style purge of people who don't believe the "right way"? And what happened to the idea of a free market? In a free market gays who want to change their lifestyle should be able to find a counselor that believes that's possible. Gays who don't can find plenty of counselors to affirm them.

[WaltM]

What U.S. law forbids discrimination against gays? Please cite. Gays are not considered a "discreet insular minority" under the law.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 prohibits discrimination in federal employment on the basis of conduct that does not affect job performance. The Office of Personnel Management has interpreted this as prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Is the best I can think of.

Otherwise, only some states have specific employment laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

If they were then "Don't ask, don't tell" wouldn't be legal. I'm not saying DADT is the right law, but it couldn't exist if discrimination against gays was actually barred by U.S. law. Actually there are some state laws that go much further in barring discrimination against gays than federal law. Maybe that's what you're talking about.

Yes, that's what most people think of, and take for granted.

And what's with this acceptance of thought crimes? We're really going to endorse a 1984 style purge of people who don't believe the "right way"?

Depends on how deviant the thought is. I'm not one of those "as long as you hurt nobody" people.

And what happened to the idea of a free market?

Do you believe in a free market where competing theories of whether a person has rights is up to the vote of each person's wallet?

In a free market gays who want to change their lifestyle should be able to find a counselor that believes that's possible. Gays who don't can find plenty of counselors to affirm them.

But you don't believe gays have a RIGHT to be treated fairly, do you?
(if you do, then can you still say there's no law that prohibits discrimination against them?)

[WaltM]

Dannno, did you miss this part of the article?

Keeton, 24, is pursuing her master’s degree in counseling at Augusta State. After her professors learned of her biblical beliefs, specifically her views on homosexual conduct, from both classroom discussions and private conversations with other students, the school imposed the re-education plan. Keeton never denigrated anyone in communicating her beliefs but merely stated factually what they were in appropriate contexts.

It's a sad day when "libertarians" agree with "re-education plans". The APA has backed away from its earlier stance that homosexuality is genetic. If that's the case then how is this lady being bigoted? Homosexuality is a lifestyle. Some agree with it, some do not. If anything this article makes the case that no state support of education should exist on any level.

Just like religion is a lifestyle, some disagree with it. So is discrimination against a religious group equally acceptable?

And what about children who's sexuality gets screwed up from being molested? Who do they go to for help in your world?

The same place as, where children's religious beliefs get screwed up from being raised by abusive parents.

[jmdrake]

Just like religion is a lifestyle, some disagree with it. So is discrimination against a religious group equally acceptable?

Someone having a personal belief that homosexuality is wrong is not discrimination. Should you be barred from whatever your profession is because you think Christianity is wrong?

The same place as, where children's religious beliefs get screwed up from being raised by abusive parents.

While I think your view on religion is ridiculous I defend your right to have it. The fact that you don't extend Christians the same courtesy is telling. You do not truly believe in freedom.

[jmdrake]

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 prohibits discrimination in federal employment on the basis of conduct that does not affect job performance. The Office of Personnel Management has interpreted this as prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Is the best I can think of.

Otherwise, only some states have specific employment laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

1) I already mentioned state specific laws.

2) The statute mentions conduct. This religious student is being discriminated against because of her belief. While this is not a case of federal employment, if this law was justly applied in this case it should protect the student who disagrees with homosexuality as a lifestyle. Unless she had done some conduct affecting her school performance her belief should not be used against her.

Depends on how deviant the thought is. I'm not one of those "as long as you hurt nobody" people.

Ah the irony. Now what was "deviant" is good and what was "good" is deviant. The same school of thought that pretended to fight against thought crime is ready to impose its own. Thankfully we still have a constitution. I don't know how much longer it will be followed.

Not to long ago people were making fun of the "storm cloud" commercial attacking gay marriage in California. But some are proving the paranoid Christians right. It's apparently not enough for gays have a right to marry. Some are ready to use to force of law to force "deviants" into line with their view of right and wrong. Anti-theocracy is no better than theocracy.

Do you believe in a free market where competing theories of whether a person has rights is up to the vote of each person's wallet?

What are you talking about? The only rights violated in this story are the right of personal belief. You do not have a right to force every member of a profession to conform to your own deviant view of right and wrong.

But you don't believe gays have a RIGHT to be treated fairly, do you?
(if you do, then can you still say there's no law that prohibits discrimination against them?)

No. Actually I don't. They have a right to be treated fairly under the law. But they do not have a right to be treated "fairly" (whatever that is) by everybody in the universe. This isn't even the "public accommodation" issue Rand was talking about with regards to the civil rights act and racial segregation. You're suggesting a rule, a very stupid and dangerous rule, that even goes beyond the constitutionally questionable 1964 civil rights act.

And further, the student in question has not been accused of treating ANYBODY unfairly! She's been targeted for having a belief. I know medical professionals who have similar beliefs that homosexuality is immoral, but don't act on that belief. And I know non religious medical professionals who secretly laugh at the disfunctionality of some of their gay patients behind their backs while putting on a politically correct face. Patients who's gay partners are their siblings. Patients who are getting sex changes but openly say they still love women and are still in love with their ex wives. Calling such patients "confused" would be an understatement. The non Christians (in my limited experience) make jokes about these people and the Christians pray for them and wish they could show Christian compassion, but they can't or else someone ignorant bean counter somewhere will call that "forcing your religion on them".

Nothing is more sacred and deserving of more protection than personal belief. You cannot always act on your belief, but not government or government run institution has a right to persecute you for your belief itself. If we're going to start going after people because they have believes that are "too deviant" then we should start with NAMBLA. But if you did that a lot of gay rights groups would come after you.

[jmdrake]

I guess this group was right. A storm is coming.

YouTube - A STORM IS COMING! ANTI GAY AD

[WaltM]

Someone having a personal belief that homosexuality is wrong is not discrimination.

Fair enough.

Should you be barred from whatever your profession is because you think Christianity is wrong?

If that's the wishes of the employer, yes.

While I think your view on religion is ridiculous I defend your right to have it. The fact that you don't extend Christians the same courtesy is telling. You do not truly believe in freedom.

I don't ever claim to truly believe in freedom, and I certainly don't treat Christians as I every other person.

[WaltM]

I guess this group was right. A storm is coming.

YouTube - A STORM IS COMING! ANTI GAY AD

a storm is definitely coming, just not as simple as you (or I) wish.

[WaltM]

1) I already mentioned state specific laws.

2) The statute mentions conduct. This religious student is being discriminated against because of her belief. While this is not a case of federal employment, if this law was justly applied in this case it should protect the student who disagrees with homosexuality as a lifestyle. Unless she had done some conduct affecting her school performance her belief should not be used against her.

Maybe the "conduct" is, admitting your belief.

Ah the irony. Now what was "deviant" is good and what was "good" is deviant. The same school of thought that pretended to fight against thought crime is ready to impose its own. Thankfully we still have a constitution. I don't know how much longer it will be followed.

I don't expect it be followed.

Not to long ago people were making fun of the "storm cloud" commercial attacking gay marriage in California. But some are proving the paranoid Christians right.

So because of a few bigoted anti-Christians on this board, paranoid Christians are right?

It's apparently not enough for gays have a right to marry.

I don't happen to believe gays have a right to marry (and it's not because I'm a libertarian).

Some are ready to use to force of law to force "deviants" into line with their view of right and wrong. Anti-theocracy is no better than theocracy.

I advocate neither per se.

What are you talking about? The only rights violated in this story are the right of personal belief. You do not have a right to force every member of a profession to conform to your own deviant view of right and wrong.

But I have a right as an employer or certifier of a degree to make them say and act a certain way if they wish to be in the field I happen to control.

No. Actually I don't. They have a right to be treated fairly under the law.

Fairly under the law? As in they have a right to be parents? As in the have a right to teach children about their lifestyle under free speech? As in the have a right to vote?

But they do not have a right to be treated "fairly" (whatever that is) by everybody in the universe.

Nor does anybody.

This isn't even the "public accommodation" issue Rand was talking about with regards to the civil rights act and racial segregation. You're suggesting a rule, a very stupid and dangerous rule, that even goes beyond the constitutionally questionable 1964 civil rights act.

No, I'm not suggesting ANY rule.

And further, the student in question has not been accused of treating ANYBODY unfairly! She's been targeted for having a belief. I know medical professionals who have similar beliefs that homosexuality is immoral, but don't act on that belief.

She acted on it by admitting it, even gays know to keep their mouths shut to stay in the military.

And I know non religious medical professionals who secretly laugh at the disfunctionality of some of their gay patients behind their backs while putting on a politically correct face.

Yeah, because they want money and don't want to be sued.

Patients who's gay partners are their siblings. Patients who are getting sex changes but openly say they still love women and are still in love with their ex wives. Calling such patients "confused" would be an understatement. The non Christians (in my limited experience) make jokes about these people and the Christians pray for them and wish they could show Christian compassion, but they can't or else someone ignorant bean counter somewhere will call that "forcing your religion on them".

Yes, non-religious homophobes are smarter, they know how to play ball by not acting like they care.

Nothing is more sacred and deserving of more protection than personal belief.

Not even life.

You cannot always act on your belief, but not government or government run institution has a right to persecute you for your belief itself. If we're going to start going after people because they have believes that are "too deviant" then we should start with NAMBLA. But if you did that a lot of gay rights groups would come after you.

NAMBLA is a good place to start, and I don't think their main opponents are non-Christians

Who cares about gay rights groups? They're not the majority (are they?)

[John Taylor]

I don't see how a bigot who thinks homosexuality is wrong could be a competent counselor for anybody, including heterosexuals. I cringe at the thought of a bible thumping moron as herself "counseling" a lesbian in college. It's potentially horrifying.

Homosexualty is wrong. It's not bigoted to say that incest is wrong, or that beastiality is wrong... it IS wrong.

[John Taylor]

I don't ever claim to truly believe in freedom, and I certainly don't treat Christians as I every other person.

That's obvious.

[WaltM]

Homosexualty is wrong. It's not bigoted to say that incest is wrong, or that beastiality is wrong... it IS wrong.

How wrong? That you're willing to imprison a person for it? Or kill a person for it?

I only believe incest is wrong from a genetics and reproductive standpoint.

I don't believe beastiality is wrong enough I'd beat a person for it.

What would you be willing to do to a homosexual?
(if you refuse to answer, your claim it's "wrong" is meaningless, if you answer, you're a hypocrite because you've not done it)

[ammorris]

Counseling, I assume, is a state-licensed profession. This girl cannot simply hang out her shingle and offer to counsel people, or she would be arrested and put in a cage. In order to practice her chosen profession, she has to receive a license from a state-approved institution. In this case, the institution in question is itself an agency of the state government. So if you are defending Augusta State's decision, you are advocating that the State of Georgia prohibit people from practicing certain professions, not because they have injured someone or even because they are incompetent, but solely on the basis of their religious beliefs.

[WaltM]

Counseling, I assume, is a state-licensed profession. This girl cannot simply hang out her shingle and offer to counsel people, or she would be arrested and put in a cage. In order to practice her chosen profession, she has to receive a license from a state-approved institution. In this case, the institution in question is itself an agency of the state government. So if you are defending Augusta State's decision, you are advocating that the State of Georgia prohibit people from practicing certain professions, not because they have injured someone or even because they are incompetent, but solely on the basis of their religious beliefs.

Yes, I AM defending the State's decision, because it IS a licensed profession. ANd it IS a matter of competence.

[reillym]

Homosexualty is wrong. It's not bigoted to say that incest is wrong, or that beastiality is wrong... it IS wrong.

Yes it is, because what people are born with cannot be wrong. That's equating it with slavery: saying blacks were born black so they are lesser than whites. Gays are born gay, what right do you have to condemn them?

None.

One day you'll learn. Hopefully sooner than later so more innocent people aren't shunned by your hate speech.

Both incest and bestiality are choices.

Also, if you are a libertarian, you should have no concern with what people do in their private lives. None. Whatsoever.

[WaltM]

Yes it is, because what people are born with cannot be wrong. That's equating it with slavery: saying blacks were born black so they are lesser than whites. Gays are born gay, what right do you have to condemn them?

So if child molestors are born as such, we can't condemn them?

None.

One day you'll learn. Hopefully sooner than later so more innocent people aren't shunned by your hate speech.

Both incest and bestiality are choices.

I don't belive incest and bestiality are always choices, nor that they're wrong.

Also, if you are a libertarian, you should have no concern with what people do in their private lives. None. Whatsoever.

what counts as private lives?

[silus]

What does this have to do with religion? The report states that this woman can't deal with gays, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered folk. If that is to be challenged, than so be it. But it has nothing to do with Christianity. :shrug

[wehrwd]

The report states that this woman can't deal with gays, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered folk. If that is to be challenged, than so be it.

What a gross mischaracterization. The young woman in question disagrees with the gay and transgendered "lifestyle" and believes people's sexual behavior is a choice they make.

That doesn't mean she "can't deal with gays," it means she disagrees with their lifestyle.

On a broader note, it's inconceivable how any self-professed libertarian could read about this blatant thought control and shrug it off, or worse, actually support what the state school's doing. To see people on this forum seem to almost do that is pathetic.

[TonySutton]

I found this in several articles on the topic.

The counseling program follows the American School Counselor Association's ethical standards, which specify that counselors in training must "recognize and accept" individual differences, cultural diversity and alternative points of view.

In the ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors it states:

The professional school counselor:
c. Respects the student’s values and beliefs and does not impose the counselor’s personal values.

http://www.schoolcounselor.org/conte...?contentid=173

This is probably the point of issue. We have only heard one side of this case so far. At some point we will hear from the school which will give us a better understanding of the issue and whether or not they are treating her fairly. I find it hard to believe people here are so quick to pass judgment, either way, without knowing all of the facts.

[Dr.3D]

What that means is, if the student says he likes to eat $#@!, then the counselor should tell them it is perfectly normal to eat $#@!.

[TonySutton]

What that means is, if the student says he likes to eat $#@!, then the counselor should tell them it is perfectly normal to eat $#@!.

No, that would be covered by this:

The professional school counselor:
a. Informs parents/guardians or appropriate authorities when the student’s condition indicates a clear and imminent danger to the student or others. This is to be done after careful deliberation and, where possible, after consultation with other counseling professionals.

http://www.schoolcounselor.org/conte...?contentid=173

[RoyalShock]

Wow, where to start.

reillym, Keeton is not engaging in what "most people consider hate speech." How is disagreeing with the origin of one's homosexualaly hate speech? Just because you have an anti-Christian bias does not mean anyone who disagrees with you on biblical grounds is engaging in hate speech.

Furthermore, this whoe thing is based on the "suspicion" of the faculty about her ability. I haven't read anything that would give them a material reason to doubt her ability.

What I find particularly interesting here is that the counseling profession have closed themselves off to intellectual discussion or discourse. Having a position that homosexual orientation is sourced in one's choices over time seems very reaonsble to me, mainly because I've developed the same theory based on personal and near-personal experience. People don't just wake up one day and say "hey, I'm choosing to be a homosexual". That's silly and NOT what Ms. Keeton is saying. But as people grow and experience life they are faced with thoughts and situations which challenge their natural sexuality. How they respond to those thoughts and situations will shape their development.

If the medical profession had been so closed-minded, can you imagine where we would be?

All in my humble opinion, of course.

[silus]

sd