Posted on 07/08/2015 8:11:28 AM PDT by xzins
The world's largest Baptist university, Baylor, has dropped language in its sexual misconduct policy that punished those who engaged in homosexual acts, a change the socially conservative school said better reflects its values as "a caring community."
Baylor, in the central Texas city of Waco, had been one of a handful of religious U.S. colleges and universities that allowed for the dismissal of students, and sometimes staff, for homosexuality.
Baylor has removed "homosexual acts" as a punishable offense in its sexual misconduct policy, an official said on Tuesday. The policy also mandated disciplinary action for sexual assault, incest, adultery and fornication.
"These changes were made because we didn't believe the language reflected the university's caring community," Baylor spokeswoman Lori Fogleman wrote in an email.
(Excerpt) Read more at charismanews.com ...
In the strictest sense, no homosexual act is sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is the reproductive act of a mammalian species, not the whole array of other ways of achieving genital pleasure.
Sure, it would have, if it was an agreed upon principle to which students agree before enrolling as a condition of enrollment and continuation.
So by your reasoning Baylor could ban interracial couples legally ? Because I thin THIS supreme court would not agree.
Who cares? Baylor is a PRIVATE Baptist university, they don't need to condone sodomy in any form.
Regardless of what any court says, Baylor CHOSE to violate Biblical mandates.
Not that I'm surprised, religious colleges in this country have a long history of embracing secularism: Harvard was founded by Puritans, nearly all of the other Ivy League schools were once religious, all of the large Catholic and Protestant colleges have abandoned the faith).
No, by my reasoning, sexual behavior is a legitimate and long known principle of the Christian faith. Therefore, asking someone to agree to that in a personally signed statement of principles would be entirely legitimate.
Is it a standard belief and practice of worldwide, historic Christianity to deny interracial marriage?
And I think they all agree to that coming in.
They can’t come in if they DON’T agree to that, but they do agree to that.
How about caring enough for people to tell them stuff they don’t like but need to hear?
I don't know why. But for a moment let's say you're right. If so, it's time to tell the court to go to hell.
Which is why I am, after all of these years (decades), glad that I have never been a fan of organized religion. Still a Christian, but not one that feels I have to belong to any church or denomination.
Which is why I am, after all of these years (decades), glad that I have never been a fan of organized religion. Still a Christian, but not one that feels I have to belong to any church or denomination.
It’s affecting independents, too.
Actually up until the middle of the last century interracial marriage was preached against in most protestant churches.
Actually up until the middle of the last century interracial marriage was preached against in most protestant churches.
I agree that interracial marriage was not advocated in protestant churches up until about the last quarter of the 20th century. The mainline denominations appeared to verbalize acceptance of the concept, but in reality, there were very few interracial marriages even in those churches.
And while there is some evidence that the Roman Catholic church as not opposed to interracial marriage, the frequency of interracial marriage among Roman Catholic whites was quite rare.
I have less information about Christianity and interracial marriage in the remainder of the world, and it will be harder to come by because the definition of interracial marriage would be quite different in other parts of the world.
That said, the position of the majority of Christianity is either silence on the subject or an acceptance of it in official circles. My guess is that in most places it simply wasn't an issue primarily because there was no intermingling of races to the degree there was in North America.
So, to answer my own question: (1) there is no serious theology in Christian history that rejects interracial marriage. (2) There was a theology of same-race marriage in America. It was a formal theology in some churches, and it was an informal rejection of interracial marriage in most of the remainder.
Just bend over.
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.