Posted on 07/23/2019 12:29:23 AM PDT by Morgana
Perhaps.
But there are many “Christian” faiths of different beliefs and I am sure they can find one that is down with homosexuality.
I sense this “couple” are using their kid to support their agenda.
The NT directed us to not separate ourselves from sinners.
I disagree with you respectfully.
‘Pod.
Sorry, bud, you’re wrong.
That bugs me to no end. It is not biologically possible for two women or two men to create children. Reporters act as if it is and it makes their right nonsensical.
No, he is not.
Love the sinner and hate the sin.
And don’t punish the child for the acts of the caregivers. If you do that, when the child grows up, you’ve created an enemy.
A tough decision for the church.
On the one hand, a church wants to welcome people and teach children about its Christian beliefs.
On the other hand, why would these two women want the children to be there, if the children will be taught to go against their own beliefs? It sounds like a setup, especially because the women ran to the news media with their story.
Also, the women’s argument doesn’t hold water. For example, they mentioned “unwed parents.” Well, unwed parents can marry.
Many families are denied membership in religious organizations due to disagreement in matters of faith. My own family was turned down a few times. Each time, I thanked those people for the information they provided and went on my merry way. I didn’t go running to the newspapers about it.
So, their behavior seems suspicious.
Agree, but the Scriptures say that we are to be as wise as serpents and as gentle as doves. Just because something is supposed to be a ‘setup’ doesn’t mean we don’t act in love and reject children.
I say, welcome the child with open arms. And keep records of all this, so if/when this becomes a setup, you can go public with it.
Unwed mothers also sometimes back off on the party girl lifestyle after they become mothers. They throttle back on the sin and look for monogamy, stability, and a husband.
“sin no more”
Do these women go to a church? Have a membership? Are their other 3 kids too young or too old for the day care?
I knew a heterosexual couple (married, now divorced) who would take their kid to church (I think to please one set of grandparents) and duck out for Starbucks when the kid was put in Sunday school. Also know of agnostic parents who prefer the moral environment of a parochial school to public school even if they don’t accept the biblical teachings.
But this couple sound like a camel sticking its nose under the tent. Same as that girl who went to Notre Dame specifically to challenge Catholic opposition to birth control.
Excellent response.
So, the lesbians are allowed to parade their sin in front of these children? Or do they agree never to come in the school together?
Looks as though some people are USING children exactly like the illegals at the border.
They are pawns used to make whatever their agenda is, to be considered normal.
They will NEVER be normal. Their preference is UNNATURAL. Against nature.
NEVER was. NEVER WILL BE. Somehow this has got to stop.
Too many innocent people are being hurt.
Agreed. I wonder how much hunting they did to find a christian day care and how many other day cares wouldn’t care they were a couple.
Methinks this specific daycare was carefully chosen.
“A tough decision for the church.”
This is a good post and i appreciate the thought you put into it. And i agree on all of your points.
I however do believe in the power of the gospel. And if that is the case then i am not afraid to expose it to the forces of evil. The gospel of progressivism is not more powerful than the gospel of christ. We must have faith that the word of god will prevail under these circumstances too. This was a perfect opportunity to demonstrate the love that god has towards us in that while we were still yet sinners he brought us in. Because of our fear we are displaying the trappings of faith but then denying the power of it.
So I absolutely stand by their right to turn these people away from their doors. And yes the gay couple did then just run to the media that’s their right too. Both sides wrong. I’m just pointing out that there was a better way to handle this situation. And that now the argument is in defense of darkness, apologetic for exclusion. If they’d been allowed in and then complained of the curriculum then the argument would be why then knowing the nature of the academy did they enroll the children there to begin with. That is the argument to have.
So I have to question whether it was a good decision. The way i see it was an opportunity to embrace these people and show them what the right thing looks like. And remember that god did indeed make a rock that he could not lift. The Stony Human Heart. It was demonstrated in the easter resurrection that the spirit can roll away the stone. The academy just hide the light under a bushel.
And how do they just assume the child’s identity like that? Maybe it prefers to be called “son”. Maybe it prefers another gender altogether.
I don’t blame ‘em. They’re doing the responsible thing by protecting the kids already under their care from the endless crazy that comes from homo behavior.
If there were two places I could choose from, and one discriminated against homos, I would choose that one. It speaks to a low tolerance for risk which is a valuable trait in that field.
The love and truth of Scripture is to be shown to all, and mercy and grace such as temporal care, but I am quite sure that there is there is more to this than meets the eye. If the daycare policy did in fact allow for the acceptance of children of parents impenitently living in known sin then it could be inconsistent to not do so for children whose parents are practicing homosexual. However, that is an assumption that is not confirmed by the daycare, and it is likely not the case.
Moreover, speaking of assumptions, it does seem odd that these lesbians would choose a known conservative daycare for their children, who would be taught Biblical morality instead, and thus it can reasonably be surmised that this was a setup, with the ACLU waiting in the wings to file a lawsuit. For like the sodomites in the days of Lot, the activists demand entry and affirmation of their chosen sin from birth room on up.
And even if the daycare did allow for the acceptance of children of parents impenitently living in known sin, it is highly unlikely that it would do so if the parents of such insisted on advertising and on affirmation of their chosen sin.
But the station that "scooped" this is evidently liberal, and thus has an agenda that does not want to be opposed but such considerations.
If they accept them they’re forced to condone their behavior by violating their tenants. That’s not how freedom of association works.
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.