Author Topic: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position  (Read 5071 times)


Michael Slusser

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 5260
    • View Profile
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #1 on: May 22, 2016, 02:02:08 PM »
http://www.wiscnews.com/baraboonewsrepublic/news/local/article_935d7201-c28b-55b0-9618-789cc770f27f.html
The "Circus City" may live up to its name. This does not appear to be a lawsuit at this point, unless the US Dept. of Agriculture has switched branches of government. But it has the makings of of a donnybrook. The Freedom from Religion Foundation, which has lodged the complaint, does not conceal its animus against organized religion, so it doesn't have the problem the ACLU has, which defends religions' unpopular teachings as well as those who are in conflict with such teachings. Whether anyone will have standing to bring some kind of suit remains to be seen.
     Thanks for catching this, Pr. Bohler.

Peace,
Michael
Fr. Michael Slusser
Retired Roman Catholic priest and theologian

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42853
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2016, 08:38:25 PM »
Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.


Homosexuality and gender identity issues are not behaviors.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Fletch

  • Guest
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2016, 08:41:44 PM »
Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.


Homosexuality and gender identity issues are not behaviors.

Oh?  Are they sin?  Curved in on self?  Outward focus on Christ?  Results of the fall?  Scriptural or Confessional reference please.

... Fletch

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42853
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2016, 08:49:43 PM »
Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.


Homosexuality and gender identity issues are not behaviors.

Oh?  Are they sin?  Curved in on self?  Outward focus on Christ?  Results of the fall?  Scriptural or Confessional reference please.

... Fletch


Lust is a sin. Coveting is a sin. They are not behaviors that can be seen by others.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Fletch

  • Guest
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #5 on: May 22, 2016, 08:52:41 PM »
Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.


Homosexuality and gender identity issues are not behaviors.

Oh?  Are they sin?  Curved in on self?  Outward focus on Christ?  Results of the fall?  Scriptural or Confessional reference please.

... Fletch


Lust is a sin. Coveting is a sin. They are not behaviors that can be seen by others.

You did not answer my question.

... F

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42853
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2016, 08:54:41 PM »
Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.


Homosexuality and gender identity issues are not behaviors.

Oh?  Are they sin?  Curved in on self?  Outward focus on Christ?  Results of the fall?  Scriptural or Confessional reference please.

... Fletch


Lust is a sin. Coveting is a sin. They are not behaviors that can be seen by others.

You did not answer my question.


You asked, "Are they sin?" Yes, like other inward sins such as lust and coveting.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Fletch

  • Guest
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #7 on: May 22, 2016, 08:56:10 PM »
Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.


Homosexuality and gender identity issues are not behaviors.

Oh?  Are they sin?  Curved in on self?  Outward focus on Christ?  Results of the fall?  Scriptural or Confessional reference please.

... Fletch


Lust is a sin. Coveting is a sin. They are not behaviors that can be seen by others.

You did not answer my question.


You asked, "Are they sin?" Yes, like other inward sins such as lust and coveting.

How do you know homosexuality is sin?  How do you know a male saying "I am female because if feel it is so" is sin?

... F

Daniel L. Gard

  • Guest
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #8 on: May 22, 2016, 09:02:20 PM »
Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.


Homosexuality and gender identity issues are not behaviors.

Right on time <sigh>

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13256
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2016, 09:12:44 PM »
Sorry I'm late. Was at a matinee in New York this afternoon, then a fine dinner with friends.
That church school is perfectly free to treat homosexuals the way it wants to treat homosexuals. And to do so, it may have to give up federal subsidies. They can say that the "error," the "wrong" is on the part of the government if they wish.
And by refusing government subsidies so that they can continue to treat homosexuality a certain way is one of the ways that they witness to what they believe to be true.
Bottom line: Take federal money, comply with federal rules. Don't like the rules, refuse the money.
Let the games begin.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2016, 09:17:38 PM by Charles Austin »
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Article coming up in Lutheran Forum journal. Now would be a good time to subscribe.
😉

Daniel L. Gard

  • Guest
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2016, 09:47:21 PM »
Sorry I'm late. Was at a matinee in New York this afternoon, then a fine dinner with friends.
That church school is perfectly free to treat homosexuals the way it wants to treat homosexuals. And to do so, it may have to give up federal subsidies. They can say that the "error," the "wrong" is on the part of the government if they wish.
And by refusing government subsidies so that they can continue to treat homosexuality a certain way is one of the ways that they witness to what they believe to be true.
Bottom line: Take federal money, comply with federal rules. Don't like the rules, refuse the money.
Let the games begin.

Now I get it. Conservative taxpayers are to fund expressions of faith like yours that conform to the Zeitgeist. If anyone departs from liberal civic orthodoxy and dares to reject a religious capitulation to the anti-Scriptural values of secularism, then they are unworthy of federal (or State) funding.

So much for the 1st Amendment. We will have a government established religion and the free expression of religion controlled by financial intimidation. Hopefully, this WELS school will stand firm and prevail against the honestly named "Freedom from Religion Foundation."

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13256
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2016, 10:28:31 PM »
Pastor Gard writes:
Now I get it. Conservative taxpayers are to fund expressions of faith like yours that conform to the Zeitgeist.
I comment:
No, you choose not to get it. Full and fair and equitable treatment of sexual minorities is not an "expression of faith." Saying that public funds can only be spent on programs that treat all people equally is not an "expression of faith." If we choose as a society to spend public funds a certain way, they they are to be spent that certain way. Pacifists support the war machine with their taxes, meaning that "their" money goes to things which violate their religious conscience.

Pastor Gard writes:
If anyone departs from liberal civic orthodoxy and dares to reject a religious capitulation to the anti-Scriptural values of secularism, then they are unworthy of federal (or State) funding.
I comment:
In a way, yes; but we are not speaking of a "religious capitulation" to anything. If a religious group want to say that Catholics may not enter their schools or that Muslims in their schools will be require to join in Christian prayer; then we as a society have decided that we do not want public money spent in such schools. The schools are free to operate; but they may not receive public funds.

Pastor Gard writes:
So much for the 1st Amendment. We will have a government established religion and the free expression of religion controlled by financial intimidation. Hopefully, this WELS school will stand firm and prevail against the honestly named "Freedom from Religion Foundation."
I comment:
This is nonsense and you know it. Government does not "establish religion," nor does it control religion by "financial intimidation." Do you contend that your church schools have an automatic right to receive tax money? Then you are the one who would entangle government with religion and give offense to everyone who does not agree with how your schools enforce religious beliefs and practices.
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Article coming up in Lutheran Forum journal. Now would be a good time to subscribe.
😉

pearson

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2126
    • View Profile
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #12 on: May 22, 2016, 11:37:33 PM »

Bottom line: Take federal money, comply with federal rules. Don't like the rules, refuse the money.


Exactly.  The moral of the story:  If you accept other people's money, you'd best be prepared to accept other people's values as well.

Tom Pearson

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12370
    • View Profile
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #13 on: May 23, 2016, 12:16:22 AM »

Bottom line: Take federal money, comply with federal rules. Don't like the rules, refuse the money.


Exactly.  The moral of the story:  If you accept other people's money, you'd best be prepared to accept other people's values as well.

Tom Pearson
Sounds all neat, tidy and pious.  However, the modern welfare state (not only as it applies to welfare payments to the poor, but governmental welfare to corporations, educational institutions, health institution, farming, home buying {tax deductible mortgage payments} and nearly every other facet of contemporary life place anyone who would not have such governmental largess at a nearly prohibitive disadvantage.

One example.  Both the LCMS and the ELCA sponsor institutions of higher education, colleges, universities and seminaries.  By and large, correct me if I am wrong, these schools receive no direct federal money nor often direct state funding to carry out their educational mission.  However, all of these schools receive indirect federal and possibly state moneys in the form of aid to students, federally insured student loans, Pell Grants, VA student assistance, targeted scholarships, etc.  Without those indirect federal and state moneys, the schools would be unable to replace the student assistance, students would not be able to afford to go to the schools and they would likely go out of business or be drastically downsized.  Should the government tell these schools that unless they follow certain guidelines, even if to follow those guidelines would be to violate the religious beliefs of their sponsoring entities, the student assistance will be shut down?  The result would almost certainly be the closing of the schools.  Would that not burden the practice of their religion?

Similarly, hospitals even if they do not receive direct governmental subsidies, receive Medicare and Medicaid payments made in behalf of their patients.  Should the government be allowed to deny those payments if the hospital does not perform abortions, or supply sterilizations or health insurance to their workers to provide such things even if to do that goes against the religious beliefs of the sponsoring religious organizations?  Would that not burden the practice of their religion?

Approaching this from another angle.  Is the federal government free to make any every rule that it deems appropriate to accomplish its goals?  Are there no limits (short of voting all the bums out of office or armed insurrection) on what rules the federal government may make and inforce?  One of the goals of the federal government is to protect the citizenry from terrorist attack.  May the federal government make as rules to accomplish that goal that it may monitor any and all the mail, telephonic communication, email, or other communication that happens within the United States or between anyone, even citizens, within the United States and abroad in order to ferret out terroristic threats?  May it incarcerate those that its agents think might be threats indefinitely without trial or benefit of counsel until they are satisfied the threat is passed?  May it establish a rule by which those suspected of involvement in terrorism or other federal crime may be tried in a secret court by special judges appointed by the law enforcement agencies involved?  Why not, if the federal government thinks those rules are necessary why can't they make those rules?

The First Amendment has not yet been repealed.  Free exercise of religion is a right specifically established by that amendment.  Freedom of Religion is not simply a luxury granted by the federal government when it doesn't get in to way of something that it wants to accomplish.  There are times when freedom of religion must give way to other consideration, but there is a high standard that should be met to make that determination.  It must be more than simply, the Federal Government made the rule, follow it or suffer the consequences.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 42853
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: WELS School Sued Over Transgender Position
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2016, 01:05:29 AM »
Sorry I'm late. Was at a matinee in New York this afternoon, then a fine dinner with friends.
That church school is perfectly free to treat homosexuals the way it wants to treat homosexuals. And to do so, it may have to give up federal subsidies. They can say that the "error," the "wrong" is on the part of the government if they wish.
And by refusing government subsidies so that they can continue to treat homosexuality a certain way is one of the ways that they witness to what they believe to be true.
Bottom line: Take federal money, comply with federal rules. Don't like the rules, refuse the money.
Let the games begin.

Now I get it. Conservative taxpayers are to fund expressions of faith like yours that conform to the Zeitgeist. If anyone departs from liberal civic orthodoxy and dares to reject a religious capitulation to the anti-Scriptural values of secularism, then they are unworthy of federal (or State) funding.

So much for the 1st Amendment. We will have a government established religion and the free expression of religion controlled by financial intimidation. Hopefully, this WELS school will stand firm and prevail against the honestly named "Freedom from Religion Foundation."


Conservative taxpayers can contribute directly to the institutions of their choice. If enough conservative people did that, the institution wouldn't need the government funds.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]