Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Quackenbush's' started by GT WT, Jul 22, 2010.
GT WT, I think they would recognize a difference between evil people and sinful acts. Which is to say, engaging in sinful behavior doesn't make one "evil". Using the language that Christians must think homosexuals are evil people seems like a misrepresentation of their core beliefs.
That said, it is a nuanced distinction which probably doesn't feel very meaningful if you believe that those "sinful acts" are an innate part of who you are... or who you were created to be (if you are homosexual AND Christian).
Personally, I believe that someone who believes homosexuality is both a choice and a sin shouldn't be counseling homosexuals. That said, I don't think it is appropriate or responsible for universities to dictate beliefs, unless those beliefs prevent the student from completing curriculum. I also don't think it is appropriate or responsible for employers to dictate beliefs, unless those beliefs result in an inability to perform the position as it is defined.
If Jennifer is employed by a clinic and counsels homosexuals that they are engaged in sinful acts, then I think the clinic is right to fire her. If Jennifer asks for a recommendation from a professor who feels that her personal beliefs hamper her ability to appropriately apply her trade, then I think the professor is not only right but obligated to withhold that recommendation. If Jennifer writes her dissertation/thesis on the morality of homosexuality, then I think the university is within their rights to not accept her offering.
That said, if she meets the criteria for admissions, then her personal beliefs should not be used to exclude her from graduate programs. If she is practicing in an area which doesn't conflict with her beliefs, or she is able to separate her beliefs from her practice as required by her employer, then her personal beliefs should not be used to exclude her from employment.
BHud and GT_WT,
To be clear, the Biblical view is that everyone is evil, ourselves included. At the same time, you shouldn't assume that a counselor who has a Biblical worldview is going use condemnation as counseling technique to those who are gay or even those who alcoholic. I would think in most circumstances the sexuality of the person being counseled is not even going to be an issue. I don't see the big deal. If a counselor offends any of their clients that client will have many other choices to go to. If the student can pass the course work, they should be allowed to get the degree. If a professor refuses to write a letter of recommendation, that is his choice too.
Mona speaks well. Christianity teaches the doctrines of original sin, and total depravity. This means that not only are all people bent toward evil all the time, but also that the entire world, the natural world included is effected by sin, and bent towards evil, or chaos, or wrong-ness as well.
I would consider myself an evangelical Christian, who believes in the Fundamentals of the faith (a la the 1910-1920 Fundamentals of the Faith), and I am in a mainline 'liberal denomination, the UMC. I just preached a sermon on how so called 'natural' phenomonon are not at all natural, but rather the result of a world gone wrong because sin is in the world. Not because a person commits a sinful act, but because of Sin, as a whole.
Homosexuals are no more sinful than other people. Homosexuality is no more a sin than any other sexual sin. If we use Jesus' standard than looking at another person lustfully is adultery, and on that ground I know that I at least am as guilty as a homosexual prostitute. We are all guilty. Anything else is a bastardisation of what Christianity, and Christ himself teaches.
As far as I know a counselor is only supposed to 'treat' what a patient/client identifies as the problem they want changed or fixed in their life.
GT_WT, you bring up a good point about protecting an emotional vulnerable person. I would think that is the job of a manager to communicate what is considered appropriate. If the counselors actions are deemed inappropriate then they are liable for firing or other recourse. The self-employed in the same situation will quickly see that finding clients will be more difficult.
The real issue is whether gay people should be counseled to accept their sexuality or repress it, based entirely on the religious views of the counselor. Considering that repressing their sexuality will be lifelong and probably lead to an unhappy life, I don't see how counseling in this manner can be beneficial to the recipient. Repression is best left to faith based counselors who are up-front about their counseling being based on religious doctrine.
Having consensual sex is always an act of will, no matter the nature of human sexual orientation. The issue here is one of self-control--what the old-time philosophers called temperance--and whether we are to sanction the idea that human beings are, essentially, slaves to their urges; or instead, whether we can aspire to be masters of them.
If "repressing" natural urges necessarily leads to an unhappy life, then are we all unhappy?--Don't we "repress" our nature many dozens of times each day, when it comes to our spending habits, our appetites, or the opposite sex, or the countless other impulses that we would like to indulge?
I have realized that I was wrong. Furthermore:
1. Muslims should be barred from all professional licensure as therapists.
2. Orthodox Jews should also be banned.
3. No Mormons should be allowed to be counselors.
4. "Social" churchgoers are OK.
5. Christians should be excluded from medical school and from residency programs.
6. Other people with religious beliefs may be eligible for certain educational programs and for certain professional licenses. A board of objective and trustworthy atheists will review petitions for inclusion. Those who make convincing cases that they either (1) reject their beliefs or (2) will be able to resist the impulse for rash and fervorous behavior in spite of their superstitions will be allowed to be included in professional society on a case by case basis.
Sexual orientation varies from those others greatly. Repressing it forces a person to live a completely different life. One of solitude. Or one where they feign interest in a person who is supposed to be their partner.
Counselors should not be in the business of pushing their belief system on others. Now if the others are already entrenched in the same belief system, then they know what they are getting themselves into. This is why this type of ideology is best left to faith based counseling, and not taught in public psychology schools or practiced by general psychologists.
That's not to say that each patient isn't different. Some have belief systems which they value more than their sexuality. Others will be much better off accepting and living as a homosexual. However, these should be guided by the patient's views and not those of they psychologist.
Not everyone is Christian. There are real problems with statements like Monahorns saying that homosexuality is a sin. While it may be a sin for monahorns and you, it isn't for everyone, and unless Jennifer is working out of a faith-based practice, it won't be for all her patients.
Flip it around. How would you feel about a psychologist who told all her patients that Christianity is irrational and wrong?
Homosexuality is a sin.
Drunkenness, is sin.
Lying, is a sin.
Anything that separates one from Christ, is a sin.
For that matter, too much time on the net, even in the name of research, could be a sin if it gets in the way of one's walk with Christ.
Does that mean any of the above sinners is bad? Sure. We're all sinners, and deserve Hell, but because God is NOT mostly mad, and mostly sad when it comes to His view of us....we aren't concemned, if we accept His gift.
For a counselor to condemn someone, if the Father doesn't.....it would not line up with Christian doctrine. It might line up with someones hateful belief, but not The Word.
I do not agree with the statement that because she identifies with fundamentalist Christianity, she would label someone who sins as evil Jesus said love, above all else, after all.
Sorry, everyone doesn't live in HBud's world. His blanket statements are not fact, they are his belief system, and not the belief system of numerous other people.
I respect religious values when people use them for personal moral and ethical grounds, but when they push them on others who don't share their beliefs, that's where the line has to be drawn in the sand.
As a society, America's legal and justice systems may have derived from the Old Testament laws, but we don't incorporate all of them. Like it or not, we completely reject some of them which are obsolete due to changes in our understanding of the world around us.
Attitudes toward homosexuality have changed, and the Old Testament view of it is no longer part of our laws in the United States.
If you want to stone them to death because of your religious views, you will go to jail. If you want to impose your conservative religious views on the educational. legal or the psychological counseling system, you don't have the right.
If you want a faith based counseling program through your church, have at it, no law against it.
Jennifer is not being discriminated against. She wants to impose her religion on the educational system.
I'm wondering: what does the counseling/psychology community say about bi-sexuals, and whether or not their preference is a choice or a condition that they were born with?
The faculty at ASU are being needlessly heavy handed. Seems clear cut. Not that there are no arguments that can be made, but it seems that the state is going against the interests of academia every bit as much, if not more, than trying to protect them.
If she allows her beliefs to interfere with her work, i.e., disregarding the dominant instructions in the field, ding her in the grade book;
If she causes disruption in the class room then counsel everyone involved with an eye toward getting the students to tolerate one another, i.e., both she and those threatened or offended by her beliefs need to demonstrate that they can handle counseling someone whose beliefs and practices they find offensive;
If she is harassing people outside of the class, people who don't want to listen to her on their own time, then disallow such harassment in whatever manner possible, though simply brooking the topic should not be enough to trigger any disciplinary measures;
Any prescribed reading should be made part of regular classes or work aimed at completing any requirement like comprehensives, etc.
I didn't read much of the complaint, but it seems that the school will have to show that they have some sort of general practice aimed at addressing the ways personal belief interacts with providing effective counseling to people whose behavior is deemed inappropriate by the would-be counselor's world view.
This would require that everyone have some sort of diversity training, including the faculty (they may indeed undergo such training).
I don't see anything wrong with letting the students work toward using the current literature to concoct their own method and manner. If the method and manner is born of particularly conservative christian values, then fine. As long as she can handle the basics that are required of everyone, then let her do what she wants.
I personally find her beliefs to be noxious, but she might be a really great person who is alot of fun to talk to if you have the right attitude.
Ultimately, I don't think there is any reason to assume her religious position in re counseling gays, etc., is something that will be problematic. She is probably going to provide a counseling service to people who want that kind of attention. She should have the best training she can get. I think people that want to convert homosexuals are idiotic, but hey, throw your shingle up and see what happens.
FWIW, I have always known that I wouldn't be an Ob/Gyn because I am fundamentally opposed to abortion. I don't know where that falls in the scope of this discussion, but it's a personal experience with some relevance.
So are we saying that sexual preference, at least to some degree, is a choice that people make?