Arizona Christian university grants benefits to same-sex spouses

Reuters ^ | 11/13/15 | David Schwartz

[markomalley]

A large, private Christian university in Arizona has decided to extend full spousal benefits to the married partners of its gay and lesbian employees despite continued adherence to religious principles reserving marriage solely for heterosexual couples.

    Grand Canyon University officials said on Friday the benefits will now be extended to same-sex couples throughout the school's workforce following a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June legalizing these unions nationwide.

    In a statement, school officials said the decision was made out of respect for the individuals involved throughout the university, and for "the system of government and laws that exist today."

    But the university, which has about 3,500 faculty and staff, said the decision does not alter its deeply held stance that marriage "is a sacred union between a man and a woman," and it said that belief will continue to be preached in its curriculum and classrooms.

"This belief is not negotiable from a biblical perspective," said the three-page statement posted on the school's website.

    The interdenominational Christian university, which has about 16,000 on-campus students and another 60,000 taking online classes, came under fire from employees in recent months over its policy denying benefits to same-sex spouses.

[Rashputin]

People who post well rebutted lies about Catholicism are bashing Catholics. People who post absolute facts about Protestantism and the fundamental doctrines it's based on aren't bashing anything.

For over four hundred years all of Protestantism taught that contraception was a sin. Then they decided it wasn't, what part of that isn't factual ?

Every major Protestant and Protestant derived group on the planet has already started coming apart at the seams over so many of their members and leaders accepting queers marrying one another, openly queer men being ordained, and everything else that is part and parcel of embracing queers and sodomy as normal. In the thirties, the same sort of thing happened in relation to contraception and remarriage after divorce. The groups that had the bestselling rationalizations for accepting those sins grew, the others withered away.

Why won't the same thing happen among US Prostentant and Protestant derived groups over queers marrying one another? Is voicing the opinion, essentially, that history will repeat itself "bashing" because it brings up the unpleasant fact that Protestantism now has no problem with things it once taught was sin, or because it places reality in too sharp a focus to easily sweep under the rug ?

Sorry, facts are facts and not I thing I said is like the anti-Catholic trash that takes things out of context. Nor does any of it resort to obvious lies like the Protestant pretense that since all of Protestantism obeys AntiChrist Pharisees and throws out part of the Bible, Catholics basing Doctrine and Dogma on what Protestants have thrown in the garbage can is the same thing as not basing Doctrine and Dogma on Scripture.

Now, explain that about face all of Protestantism took from teaching contraception is a sin to defending contraception as a virtue.

How is that not exactly like staring at ink blots and seeing one thing one day and another thing on another day ? Is Scripture a constantly changing, "evolving", series of ink blots for individuals to interpret to suit their whims, or does it mean what it says? You know, like "not by faith alone" ?

Have a nice day.

[kosciusko51]

So, by your own definition, you are Protestant-bashing when you claim all of Protestantism did an about face on contraception, when in fact, there are several denominations, and many individual Protestants, that do not support contraception.

What we see with these universities and denominations that accept the sodomite lifestyle is turning away from the truth of scripture. Many of these denominations do not believe that the Bible is the inerrant, but only contains the word of God. This is not what Luther and the early Reformers taught, and to say otherwise is also a lie.

What we see here and in some of the clergy of the Roman Catholic church is an embrace of humanistic thinking rather than the truths of scripture. I’m sorry that you see it otherwise.

Grace and Peace,
K51

[yongin]

sad to see grand canyon u cave to the demands of the aclu. soon, these gay employees will demand a safe workplace by demanding changes to the school teachings. the school’s for-profit status may set the school to be vulnerable to sued.

[yongin]

first hope college, goshen college, eastern mennonite university, and now grand canyon university.

[nonsporting]

They have gone over to the enemy.

Homosex is an abomination. Those who engage in it are worthy of death according to Leviticus 20:13. If you don’t like God’s judgment on this, take it up with Him.

[boatbums]

Some people are oblivious to truth and no matter how many times their hysterical and misinformed ideas are refuted will continue to assert they are right and anyone who opposes them is wrong. At least others reading these threads benefit from the wisdom INFORMED posters provide. Thank you.

[Rashputin]

"by your own definition"

Apparently your personal definition of anything is whether or not there are a handful of people who claim to be part of a given belief system who don't agree with the majority. Therefore, all Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, don't actually believe in one God since there are a handful of people in each group who claim to be members of that group and who believe in multiple Gods or who claim, for instance, that members of another group believe in multiple Gods since they accept the doctrine of the Trinity. Hence any generalization about any group is worthless and only individual beliefs matter.

Given that Self and Self Alone view, (an integral part of both Protestantism and Snowflake Liberalism by the by), there are no Muslims, no Communists, no Capitalists, or any other identifiable group since anyone can choose what they call their Self and any individual may disagree with the all other members of that group or the vast majority of members of that group. On that basis, Bruce Jenner is really a woman, all science is questionable, and so on.

Thank you for explaining that there's no basis for discussing anything since every little snowflake is unique.

I will henceforth keep that in mind when I see you name on a comment.

[MayflowerMadam]

Maybe christian, but not Christian.

[cookcounty]

"It didn't even take a decade for the vast majority of non-Catholc US "Christians" to accept the complete reversal of going from preaching that contraception was a sin to preaching it is a virtue and they'll all fall over for this and preach that it's Ok in even less time."

Non-Catholic Christians have never held contraception to be a sin. The Aristotelian view that interrupting intercourse is "against nature" is not and has not been a position of any significant Protestant/Evangelical group that I know of. Aristotle was an interesting guy, but he's not in the Bible. We oppose abortion because it destroys a young human life, not because of an "interruption" in nature.

[af_vet_1981]

Hasn’t been a Christian University in a long time.

The college was founded as a nonprofit institution in 1949 in Prescott. Arizona Southern Baptists felt the need to establish a faith-based institution that would allow local Baptists the opportunity to obtain a bachelor's or master's degree without going east to one of the Baptist colleges in Texas or Oklahoma. On October 8, 1951, Grand Canyon College relocated to its current location in Phoenix.[4]

Suffering financial and other difficulties in the early part of the 21st century, the school's trustees authorized its sale in January 2004 to California-based Significant Education, LLC,[5] making it the first for-profit Christian college in the United States.[6]

In the fall of 2014, with the school in a better place financially, it announced the exploration of a return to non-profit status on October 29. The university's president and CEO, Brian Mueller, said in a statement: "We do not have a philosophical issue with having a for-profit status and having investors. However, the stigma surrounding the for-profit industry – some of which is deserved, and some not – is real and it is not improving. And no matter what GCU does to separate itself, its detractors continue to try to use this stigma to detract from GCU’s success."[7] Mueller has noted that GCU has been immune to a lot of the problems associated with for-profit colleges, mainly because of its regional accreditation.[7]

[kosciusko51]

You are the one who claimed that ALL Protestants are for contraception, which is a LIE. You are the one who said it was bashing for telling falsehoods about another’s definition. I pointed out that you were bashing based on your falsehood.

Furthermore, you continue to use the lie of self and self alone regarding Protestants. This is your one playing card, and like the Left’s race card, it has been overplayed.

If you want to discuss like a rational person, I’m open to that, but if you want to continue to slander me, then I agree there is no further room for discussion.

S.G.D.
K51

[af_vet_1981]

Non-Catholic Christians have never held contraception to be a sin.

Demonstrably false

Tonight we began a natural family planning class. The instructors took the opportunity to discuss the evils of contraception, which was not surprising since the class is offered through a Roman Catholic hospital. What was surprising to me was that they said that until 1930 contraception was universally condemned by all Christian churches, Catholic and Protestant. They quoted Luther, Calvin, and Wesley as saying that it is a form of murder and sodomy, and that people who use contraceptives can lose their souls. Does the Bible implicitly or explicity teach that contraception is sinful, even for married people? If not, what did the early Protestant leaders make such bold statements?

Answer
It does appear that many, many Protestants wrote or spoke against the practice of birth control on the basis of the Onan incident (in Gen. 38:8-10 Onan "spilled his seed on the ground" every time he slept with Tamar). The traditional Protestant arguments based on this passage have been the same as those put forth by the Roman Catholic Church. Simply put, many Protestant exegetes have agreed with the Roman Catholic interpretation over the years.

[cookcounty]

"For over four hundred years all of Protestantism taught that contraception was a sin. Then they decided it wasn't, what part of that isn't factual ?"

Oh, that's crazy talk.

I am 67 years old, grew up in a very typical Baptist church, going to church Sunday morning Worship and Sunday school then "youth" Bible Study followed by Evening Service every single Sunday unless severely ill, went to a conservative Presbyterian College which required religious credit hours, later spent a year studying Theology (grad school).

The very first time I ever saw it even suggested that Protestants taught contraception to be sin was today on this thread. You are profoundly mistaken about Protestant beliefs about contraception. A man and woman who are married are entirely free to give each other sexual pleasure, indeed it is considered, generally, to be a positive good in itself. Sex is a physical expression of a deeper spiritual connection between man and wife. Protestants and Catholics have differing views on human sexuality. There is nothing inherently superior in a celibate life, though it can be preferable in some cases.

[kosciusko51]

I have met and heard many non-Catholic Christians that are against modern forms of birth control, but not due to the views of Aristotle, but because they believe that it violates the “be fruitful and multiply” command given in the Garden, and that several forms of BC can cause an abortion.

[af_vet_1981]

So, by your own definition, you are Protestant-bashing when you claim all of Protestantism did an about face on contraception, when in fact, there are several denominations, and many individual Protestants, that do not support contraception.

Can, and will, you provide evidence there are several denominations that prohibit contraception as sin by naming them so all may thereby profit ?

[kosciusko51]

Sure. I'll give you one denomination example: the Amish. Clearly, they are Protestant, and believe all methods, including the natural forms of family planning allowed by the RCC, are sinful. One is sufficient to prove not all.

Furthermore, as I pointed out there are many within conservative denominations that hold this view, as evidenced in this article:

More Protestants Oppose Birth Control

I will freely admit that most Protestant denominations allow contraception. However, this is one of those items where several leading thinkers in the denominations, such as Al Mohler of the SBC, are taking a serious re-examining of their position.

The biggest issue I have with this discussion is that Protestant are at viewed as monolithic in their thinking and as only ruled by self. It can't be both.

[cookcounty]

A lot of Catholic theology being injected into supposed Protestantism:

(The instructors said that Protestants teach that) "…….people that use contraceptives can lose their souls"

Don't know who the "instructors" are, but they need to get an education. Catholics and Protestants quite different views of "Grace." While theoretically there may be some in the Holiness movement that subscribe to the idea of loss of their souls because of the use of contraceptives (though I doubt it), that's not even possible in majoritarian Protestant or Evangelical theology because a Christian cannot '"lose his soul" because he has sinned. We sin every day, pretty much every hour. It is not our righteousness that makes us acceptable to God, it is Christ's righteousness imputed to us, because we have trusted and believed. If our salvation is dependent on keeping ourselves continuously pure, then we will pretty much all go to hell, including the Pope.

Agree with it or not, but it IS our theology, and the "Instructors" you speak of are stone cold ignorant of Protestant theology.

[af_vet_1981]

Assuming the Amish regard artificial contraception as a sin (which I did not verify), I read your linked article and did not find a single denomination or congregation that regards articificial contraception as a sin. Therefore your assertion is unproven as yet. I’m still waiting for named Protestant denominations that still regard it as sin, as they all used to do.

[af_vet_1981]

I would counter that it is historically demonstrable that all the Protestant denominations uniformly regarded articificial contraception, and sodomy for that matter, as sins until modern times.

[kosciusko51]

Amish and Old Colony Mennonites