90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
LGBT

Jonathan D. Fitzgerald: "Will this hit to the college’s reputation be a red flag to future employers who do not want to hire religious ideologues?" Pictured: The Clarendon Street Baptist Church Bell Pavilion, Gordon College, Wenham, Mass. (ethomsen/Flickr)

My guess is that, until recently, you had never heard of my alma mater, Gordon College. Or, if you had, maybe you knew of it, vaguely, as that religious school on the North Shore of Massachusetts. Maybe you confused it with the similarly named, and loosely affiliated seminary, Gordon-Conwell. But most likely, you had just never heard of it.

That is, until July 4, when The Boston Globe published a story about a letter to President Obama requesting a religious exemption from Executive Order 13672, which bans federal contractors from using discriminatory hiring practices on the basis of sexual orientation. The president signed the order on Monday, July 21, sans religious exemption. Gordon College’s new president, D. Michael Lindsay, was among those asking for the exemption. The small Christian liberal arts college that no one had heard of was suddenly thrust into the limelight.

The news prompted the mayor of Salem, Mass., to end the city’s longstanding partnership with the college. It also sparked a conversation among fellow my alumni, both in person and via social media.

Gordon College’s Statement of Life and Conduct, which all students, staff and faculty are required to sign, bars “homosexual acts.” While some of my fellow alumni have no problem with that language, many others of us do and would like to see it excised.

Regardless of where they stand on that particular issue, however, I have yet to speak with an alumnus who supports Lindsay’s decision to sign the letter, which aligns Gordon with those who seek the right to discriminate.

Together, we have speculated about Lindsay’s thinking and motivations. Was he sincerely worried that the executive order would jeopardize the federal funding that Gordon receives? Was his decision politically motivated?

Together, we have speculated about Lindsay’s thinking and motivations. Was he sincerely worried that the executive order would jeopardize the federal funding that Gordon receives? Was his decision politically motivated?

Collectively, we have experienced waves of emotion — confusion, anger, anxiety and fear.

Yes, fear. Many have expressed concern that Lindsay’s actions have seriously jeopardized our chances of getting jobs or being accepted to graduate programs. Will this hit to the college’s reputation be a red flag to future employers who do not want to hire religious ideologues? There has even been talk of suing Lindsay for devaluing our degrees. While I’m fairly confident that no one will go quite that far, the question of what recourse we might have has been part of the conversation.

For my part, I’ve written a letter to both the president and the board of Gordon College, asking that Lindsay issue an explicit statement making clear that the college does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. To date, I’ve received only a generic response thanking me for sharing my opinion and pointing me to a website that the college set up to answer questions about this issue.

At this point, all that any of us in the Gordon College community can do, really, is hope to receive the kind of consideration from prospective employers, grad school admissions panels and others that Lindsay, in signing the letter to President Obama, seems unwilling to extend to gay and transgendered people. Come to think of it, it’s a very Christian notion I’m requesting: Please treat Gordon College graduates the way you would want to be treated  TWEET .

Related:

Tags: Gender, Law, LGBT, Religion

The views and opinions expressed in this piece are solely those of the writer and do not in any way reflect the views of WBUR management or its employees.

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • pud

    When the fundamental tenants of this “college” include the propagation of superstition and lies, it’s a stretch of the imagination that anything emanating from them would or could be taken seriously.

    • D. G.

      Based on your ignorant comment, I think your user name suits you just fine…

      • pud

        Ignorant? How is the observation of the FACT that this “college” is rooted in a cult that makes its living telling lies to youth ignorant?

        • D. G.

          So by SHOUTING, you think you have converted raw assertion into truth?

          • pud

            I’m not “shouting” and I’m not making a claim that I cannot back up with hard data. Christianity is a death cult that reveres human sacrifice, believes in all manner of nonsense that lacks any semblance of evidence and indoctrinates young people. Did I miss anything?

          • D. G.

            Human sacrifice?

            The only modern religion which advocates in favor of human sacrifice, is Pro-Abortion Secular Humanism, which do doubt, you are an adherent of. This is
            what you support:

            http://www.advocatesoflife.com/graphicabortionimages.htm

          • pud

            Ah, no…First of all there are no “modern” religions and secondly all those delusional people running around with golden icons of a dead guy on a stick dangling around their necks would argue against your position.

          • D. G.

            So you are anti-Catholic?

            You do know that “Christians” is an encompassing term which is not limited only to those denominations where the wearing of a crucifix is a common practice, right?

            I am a Baptist, no one I know from church wears a crucifix, nor is there any on the wall. An unadorned cross is present, but if you knew Scripture, you would know that Christ’s atonement was not a human sacrifice.

          • pud

            Oh..that makes it all better! I suppose you don’t subscribe to the universal christian notion that god sent jesus (himself) to die on the cross (torture and murder) to absolve mankind (vicarious redemption) of his transgressions via a human sacrifice? Or have you made up a better fantasy/mythology to ease the guilt and filth of your humanity?…because we all know humanity is filthy and worthy of death right?

            All 40,000 versions of your cult are equally delusional whether they “believe” in dead guys on sticks or mormon magic underwear

          • D. G.

            So it’s the non-provability which offends you?
            Why don’t you go to Mecca during the Haj and tell those people what you think of religions, including Islam?

          • pud

            Are you suggesting that your cult is somehow better because you don’t cut off heads or burn people alive anymore?

            Fact is I oppose any and all forms of delusional thinking including the cult of Islam. Anything that retards humanity, ignores reason and rationality and lies to children offends me

          • D. G.

            Then why don’t you prove you even-handedness by finding a few jihadi boards and start insulting them. Also, post your address, so they can come discuss it with you in person.

          • pud

            I see…I shouldn’t be dismantling your delusion unless I’m dismantling a more violent delusion too? What a cop out dude. If you want to defend your delusion have at it. I’ll shred you to pieces here on this website as is appropriate given that I like to stay on topic

          • D. G.

            No, I’ve checked you post history – you are just an anti-Christian bigot. It’s the only religion you rail against.

          • pud

            The subject of this website post is christian hello? I make my views known elsewhere but I don’t stray off subject

          • D. G.

            Not true – your posting history, which is available for all to see, evinces a rabid anti-Christian bias.

            But even so, I have proposition from you and if you accept it, I will debate you here and now. To accept my proposition, you must answer the following question with a “yes” or a “no”.

            Here’s the question: Yes or no, is it true that there are no absolutes?

            If you answer, I will debate you.

          • pud

            Happy to answer your question but I won’t be baited into your word game trickery by answering yes or no…

            All “truths” are subjective. All “truths” require a human being to judge the validity of any claim. All humans use subjective limited senses to make judgements. Therefore all “truth” claims are subjective

            Now you answer..with a definition

            What is the definition of “absolute”
            What is the definition of “truth”

          • D. G.

            Your answer does not need to define “truth”, rather you only need to assert yes or no, do you accept it as true, that there are no absolutes.

            For you benefit, Webster’s had “true” shown to mean “agreeing with the facts : not false” and “absolute” as meaning “complete and total”.

            So then, for your evidently limited intellect, allow me to re-phrase: Yes or no, do you accept as valid any premise which rests on an absolute assertion? And if not, is that because you reject the concept of an absolute assertion? And if you do reject it, is that because you claim there is no such thing?

            It’s a very simple yes or no question – are you too stupid to answer it?

          • pud

            Since you cannot refrain from insult I can only surmise that you have no interest in honest debate.

            I just explained…all assertions/truth claims are subjective because they are 100% dependent upon the subjective interpretation of a limited human being and his limited senses.

          • D. G.

            Yes or no, are you saying that there are no absolutes?

          • pud

            I answered you. I also told you that I will not be baited into a word game where you proclaim that a “no” answer is an “absolute” assertion that there are no “absolutes” I don’t argue or debate like a child. Sorry

          • D. G.

            Not true, you argue exactly as a child. When a child finds himself logically boxed in, he will typically refuse to answer (or cry). You have refused to answer the condition of my debate invitation, so we are not in fact debating.

            I told you that you must answer one question with a yes or a no. You have failed to do so.

            Now I assert that’s because you are a stupid person. You think you are smarter than you actually are. And you are fearful of facing your logical comeuppance – that’s why you won’t answer the question with the unambiguous yes/no which my offer calls for.

            Suffice it to say, you are just another cowardly anti-Christian bigot who runs and hides when faced with a superior intellect as an adversary.

            Coward.

          • pud

            Do all christians name call or is it peculiar to you?
            I’m all too familiar with the retarded circular presup delusional argument and I’m quite prepared to make another mockery of it if you like.

            I’m not answering yes or no because that is a child like method so you can go “ah ha!” “got ya”

            There is no objective authority to appeal to to validate a subjective human truth claim. Nothing what so ever to objectively verify any human beings claim of knowledge about anything. Everything every human utters is subjective based upon his perceptions using his limited faculties. This is a logical fact whether you like it or not

          • D. G.

            Gosh you are thick. Since you are so fearful of being tricked, let me spell it out for you. In human discourse, an “absolute” is a non-rebuttable premise accepted by all concerned as being true; as-in non-rebuttable.

            Does the phrase, “we hold these truths to be self-evident” ring a bell?

            So far, you have asserted at least one absolute. You have stated that there are no modern religions.

            I am asking you to verify what your position is regarding absolutes.

            Now answer the question: Yes or no, are there any absolutes?

          • pud

            More christian insults?

            Are you thick? I told you several times that I’m not going to fall for your childish trap of answering yes or no to a trick question.

            I gave a very clear answer already..several times.

            I said that all human truth claims must be subjective because they are dependent upon a human being using human senses that are inherently limited and therefore cannot be objective. I also stated that there is no authority to appeal to for verification of a human judgement on a truth claim.

            That’s all you’re going to get and it’s more than reasonable and completely valid logically

          • D. G.

            Proverbs 25:2 says the following “It is God’s privilege to conceal things and the king’s privilege to discover them.” The logic of this premise is such that, it suggests you might be wrong about God’s existence.

            Interestingly enough, that Proverb does not have to be accepted as true for it to suggest a valid idea.

            Your problem, as I have ably demonstrated, is that you are too educated for your mental capacity.

            The #1 rule for effective thought is that you must be able to distinguish between a premise which is negotiable, and one which is not. But you are unable to do this.

            I’ve tried my best to help you see that, but simply put, you are too dumb.

            If and when you answer the yes/no question I’ve posed, we can continue. Until then, buzz off.

          • pud

            Very christian of you

          • D. G.

            Indeed it is. And if you want me to show you the verse which supports it, answer the question.

          • pud

            I couldn’t care less what some unknown bronze age delusional cultist wrote..it would only be another ridiculous claim. I’ve already won this “debate” and did so when you leveled the first insult. Cheers!

          • D. G.

            You posted the first insult – you referred to Christianity as a death cult.

          • pud

            Sir, I never leveled an insult at you nor did I engage in juvenile name calling as you did.

            Christianity is a death cult. It is an apocalyptic cult completely predicated on a human sacrifice and the end of days. That is not an “insult” it is a factual observation.

          • D. G.

            It’s a pejorative characterization based on your unilateral summation of the subject under discussion. It betrays your ego and ignorance and it is indeed an insulting comment.

          • pud

            No, it is exactly what the christian cult is based upon. Do I have to quote bible verses for you? lol

            Your eternal life doesn’t begin until you are dead
            You can have no eternal life save for the blood of jesus
            Jesus “died for your sins”

            etc etc pretty straightforward stuff I’d say

          • kandm

            wow, DG, you are really embarrassing to anyone out there who is a christian. quoting the Bible and calling people dumb, not to mention the really awful bullying attempt – “yes or no! yes or no! i said yes or no and so you have to answer me!” Its another ridiculous example of Christians who are out Christian-ed by people who aren’t Christian. Nice one, buddy.
            Also, way to get totally off topic, can’t you find your own soapbox? This article is about something specific that you aren’t talking about at all . Can’t find people who want to “debate”/ be bullied in a juvenile way with you otherwise? Find a different venue!

          • D. G.

            You don’t speak for Christians and you clearly did not follow the premise of the debate condition. Not only that but a good tweak of the nose is the best medicine for such obnoxious mockers as “pud”.

          • pud

            The irony of your comment is that I’m able to attack both your delusion and the Islamic delusion because I live in a SECULAR country that has laws protecting rational thought and expression vs. a theocratic slave state which you christians drool and pine for

          • X-Christian

            “I turned myself into my own human son and I had myself tortured and killed for your personal benefit as a human sacrifice for you.” – Yahweh
            “And if you don’t believe me I’ll do worse things to you.” – Yahweh

    • J~daddy

      The word is tenet, not tenant.

      • pud

        Thank you grammar nazi! I’m usually quite good about this. Appreciate your jack boot correction

        • J~daddy

          Actually, it’s a spelling error. Grammar and spelling are not the same.

    • Matt Manella

      Consider not thinking above your mental acuity. Then again arguing with an idiot makes me one.

    • Matt Manella

      Christians are called to suffer and love idiots just like PUD too. Perhaps he will come the know the truth before he learns to truth and spends eternity alone with his authoritative beliefs. The worst punishment is eternal solitary confinement (i.e. weeping and gnashing of teeth). I dare PUD to read the Bible as an exegesis opposed to eisegesis. He knows what will happen and is scared…he should be.

      • pud

        Right! You must be one of the cult who finds it acceptable to worship and love something out of fear…kind of like the North Koreans who worship Kim Un so that he doesn’t kill them or send them to a death camp.

        • Matt Manella

          The fear of God is the beginning…you figure it out smart guy.

  • D. G.

    Not much of a partnership if a mayor can end it unilaterally – especially since it was “longstanding”.

    • blueshift

      The real problem – fear – faced by those who contract Gordon is that *they* will lose federal funding. Not a small matter for a civil institution such as a city, museum, or (gulp) public school.

  • NotKennedy

    Another homohissyfit. As to “… very Christian notion(s)…” you probably are not really going to be thrilled with the rest of them, either. Cut your losses, check out Berkeley or maybe one of those Roman based seminary plans. You’re gonna love your new life! Better that Gordon should leave the government money to government beneficiaries and exercise discernment.

  • idler

    oxymoron: “…Christian liberal arts …”

    • blueshift

      actually, it’s not as oxymoronic as one would suppose. The teaching of liberal arts was a product of Christian missionaries and visionaries (notice I did not say hierarchical leaders, self appointed or otherwise). Some of the world’s great universities (eg, Oxford, Cambridge, Durham) are the result of one of the humble effort of these small Christian transients hacking a clearing in the woods, settling down, and starting to grow food, practice medicine, open schools. This also continued in the New World (Harvard, Yale).

      As graduate (who has many problems with the current disposition of things), I can tell you I experienced no theological interference or intrusion in the actual teaching, not even in the Bible classes where I was rewarded with a terrific grade for a paper attacking a principle tenet of the evangelical wing of Christianity.

  • Ncla

    Hmmmm. So, if the writer disagrees with Gordon College’s policy of discrimination (which is clearly stated and enforced in its Statement of Life and Conduct)– then why did you sign? why did you go there? why did you give your tuition money to a school that you admit to disagreeing with? if your ideas changed, why did you not transfer? By making such choices you have, effectively, signalled to the world that you DO align yourself with these values and therefore you should not be surprised if/ when you experience repercussions for your choices… just like Gordon College.

    • Jess

      It is rather hard to transfer out of one of these religious schools and retain full credit given the nature of the required general education courses that integrate religion. It is also common for an individual to join the school initially agreeing with the ideals only to have their opinions changed by what they witness while attending that university (oftentimes hypocrisy and/or general intolerance).

      • Ncla

        Thank you for clarifying.

      • lynn

        That isn’t a true statement at all. As a Gordon alum and someone who considered transferring, I would know. Gordon has always been an extremely well respected college. I had the option to transfer to many great schools, such as Connecticut College, Haverford College, NYU, Columbia and more. And they were willing to transfer all of my credits. This statement is just an erroneous assumption and incorrectly implies that Gordon doe not offer a sound education. Even my religion classes- Old Testament and New Testament- were transferrable! Sigh. It would be great if people would quit misrepresenting Gordon. It is not some cult.

  • Evelyn Gardiner

    Superstition, huh? So, now Christianity is a superstition? The Roman Empire once accused Christians of being atheists, an equally ignorant notion, until the world wised up and allowed the church to launch Western Civilization, of which the U.S. is a by-product. It is so hard for our pluralist society to accept any absolutes, what so ever. Every view or principle seems to be accepted in society, except ones that espouse biblical truth. But here again, I as a Christian, am not surprised, for the truth about homosexual behavior flies in the face of those whose desires are to only satisfy their own cravings, homosexual or otherwise. Homosexual behavior is just as much a contradiction as the notion as same-sexual marriage and same-sex couples…..no such entity…no such union. Never could be; never can be. The same cannot be joined. And I’ll take God’s word over human’s any day. Humans can’t stand for anything except what suits them. I support Gordon College 150% because it is on the right side of history and the right side of morality.

    • pud

      Of course it is a superstition! It is an apocalyptic death cult built upon delusional beliefs that lack even a shred of empirical data. It reveres human sacrifice, worships a malignant god and roots for the end of days. It is wholly “immoral” in all its teachings and doctrines and never should have left the bronze age from which it was born.

      • downtown21

        You’re not helping. Can you please grow up?

        • pud

          That is a very nonsensical post friend.

    • downtown21

      None of what you said here is remotely relevant to the college president’s desire to practice illegal employment discrimination.

    • X-Christian

      “I shot my son for your personal benefit” – Yahweh.
      Yuck.

    • Jane1213

      How does anyone know what God has to say on this subject of homosexuality? It is mortal man who wrote the bible to begin with and it was based on their lives at that time and what they believed at that time. Homosexuality is NOT a choice, people are born this way. If God wasn’t going to love them He would not have made them homosexuals. As for homosexuality being a choice, as some believe, ask yourself one important question; why would anyone choose to be a homosexual – forced to live with such indignity through those whose religion does not accept them as God’s children like everybody else.

  • Matt Manella

    “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world.” – Source: You figure it out.

    The author didn’t talk to me or my fellow alumni at Gordon College. Jonathan D. Fitzgerald speaks for himself and perhaps some other Gordon College alumni who have become cultural sell outs. I suggest they go get another degree (they obviously didn’t learn anything anyway), join another faith or find another religion or continue to be a possers who will all be sifted out eventually.

    Christians are a people of the Book and defend it regardless of the cultural winds that blow. It has nothing to do with hate, it has to do with conduct. Join the army…expect rules of conduct. Join a religion…expect rules of conduct. Join a country…expect rules of conduct. If you don’t like the rules don’t join.

    I wouldn’t hire you because you went to Gordon and its rules of conduct, I wouldn’t hire you and your ilk because your sell outs.

    Before irrationality gets the better of the author or a responder. Yes I love LGBT individuals, including family and friends, I work with them, I give them business and support their right to be full citizens of the United States of America. However, the Christian Church is NOT the United States of America. Obama will be gone soon enough and my Federal Tax dollars perhaps won’t be held hostage by the religion of the United States of America.

    However, I would rather have them stop spending, keep them and pay off the debt they have saddled us all with.

    • downtown21

      Nobody is interested in debating the tenets of your religion. That’s not relevant here and that you don’t understand that indicates you just don’t get it. This is about employment law!

      • Matt Manella

        It is more than about employment law! Politics like chess is played thinking many moves ahead. Its about free association! This still exists but the tax dollars of Bible believing Christians may no longer be available to the causes they care about. Obama made this change to force the Legislative process. This whole issue is stupid because this executive order will be overturned and Christian associations will be protected.

        I for one hope that my Alma Mater becomes like Grove City, taking no Federal money. Without question the current Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) is out of favor with the people. What is their approval rating?

        Better to not rely on the Government for anything when eventually they will not be able to provide for anybody but themselves.

        Looking forward to 11:59 am on January 20, 2017 when the music stops.

        • jean

          I believe that Grove City (& Hillsdale) are able to have no students with federal loans/grants because they have extremely wealthy right-wing patrons who fund those colleges. Without that Gordon would be able to exist only by greatly raising prices/lowering salaries, making it a school for only wealthy students. Govt. aid to students makes economic diversity possible.

    • Larry

      Is the separation of church and state the only part of the constitution your religious extremism hates?

      • Larry

        Also, “join a country expect rules of conduct” as you say… Then don’t complain about a president that holds to those rules… Church doesn’t get exemption and federal dollars. Take your hatred and extremism elsewhere.

        • Matt Manella

          Render unto Ceaser…

          Hate is a strong world, defender of a faith rooted in a book whose influence, depth and transformative truths is unquestionable would be more accurate; tomato tomato. The juvenile untested over the millennium philosophy will pass like a feat in the wind. One cannot argue on spiritual levels unless graced with faith. Ask and the door will be opened…

      • james81

        Larry,
        Where do you find “separation of church and state” in the Constitution? Is it just after the right to terminate the unborn?

  • Jonathan Sherwood

    It is correct to assume that Mr. Fitzgerald does not speak for all alumni and that, of course, he himself has not spoken with all of them (alumni) before he wrote this. I don’t know him but, as a Gordon College graduate (’87), he does speak my mind. This has been a painful experience for many of the ‘friends’ of Gordon College, on all ‘sides’ of the issue, safe to say. The Gordon College that Mr. Fitzgerald and I both (presumably) value gave us a liberal arts education where we were able to pursue a far ranging education (politics and philosophy, for me) in the context of an ecumenical Christian environment. Gordon College took me to the Soviet Union of Gorbachev and the Poland of the Solidarity movement (as learners, not proselytizers) and launched me into a career in affordable housing and homeless services and a life of public service. This is all the more reason that Dr. Lindsay’s decision to thrust the college into this position is so difficult. After also receiving a form response to my questions about this (questions submitted at the Board of Trustees’ invitation), I chose to protest the signing of the letter to President Obama by returning my diploma to the Trustees. http://www.onegordon.com/blog/why-i-am-returning-my-gordon-college-diploma

    • Matt Manella

      Powerful statement if anyone cared.

  • tanyam

    The comments here are utterly predictable, boring and useless — on both sides. “I read your touche comment online and completely changed my religious views,” said no one ever.

    • X-Christian

      but yours is somehow better?

  • james81

    Jonathan,

    Is it just the homosexual acts in Gordon’s policy you believe should be exempted?

    Do you think Gordon should change their policy so as not to proscribe any extramarital sexual acts?

    Do you think a religious institution should have a policy regarding sexual mores? In a biblical context, what about Gordon’s current policy is unbiblical?

    • Jonathan D. Fitzgerald

      Honestly, I have no objection to Gordon maintaining a policy of life and conduct. Personally, I disagree with certain aspects, but that there is a community covenant that all members of the community must sign onto does not bother me in the least.

      Surely you know there is not total agreement within Christianity about homosexuality. That many Christians hold to the essential creeds and yet do not believe that homosexuality or related acts are sinful can not come as a surprise. I think that Gordon can and should maintain a community covenant that holds its members to standards of Christianity, but I think it is worth revisiting those standards from time to time and considering whether they are essential to the faith.

      • D. G.

        Jonathan, in so much as you are trying to say homosexuality is not sinful (for Christians) this statement of yours is false “not total agreement within Christianity”. If indeed we stipulate that Christians accept that Jesus is the Living Word and the Bible is the word of God, then there is no escaping that homosexual activity is indeed a form of sex-activity sin. It simply is not possible to ignore the plain words of the Bible on this topic, not if you want to call yourself a Christian. That said, there are indeed many who profess to be Christians and who do not agree the homosexuality is sin, but that’s the real reason why this is an issue. And it’s the same reason why Jesus is a stumbling block: Certain things are just so, and just so because God made it that way. It’s a tough row for educated people to hoe – submitting to the authority of the Word. But just like how a camel must get down on his knees to get through the eye of the needle (the eye of the needle is the small door in the big gate of Jerusalem), with no burdens on his back, so too must educated people be willing to put their own self-edifying logic aside and simply abide what the Bible says (such as Leviticus 18:22). People who have trouble with this, probably also have trouble with Proverbs 12:15…

      • jean

        A part of the current problem is that huge negative judgments have been made publicly on the basis of much conflation & erroneous information. Even if some words were changed, say leaving out any reference to “homosexuality” would that make any difference now? Whatever rules there are must be the same for both sexes. Would you wish for Gordon heteros to indulge in sexual activity? If so, that change will never happen
        since Gordon takes a high view of the sanctity of marriage as an example of Christ’s love for his Church taught in Scripture.

  • cthej

    At BYU the students sign a pledge not to engage in what one might otherwise term “heterosexual acts.” Why should this case be any different? It’s a private school, there’s plenty of theology to back up the president’s position, and we all know a homosexual act when we see one. Why all the fuss?

    • D. G.

      Because militant gay advocates are not interested in live-live. Instead, they want to force all systems to yield to their ethos.

  • X-Christian

    Religion is the problem; It makes claims for itself which it cannot support
    and it insists everyone else accept the claims as a way to prove the claims must be true.
    Nonsense. All of it.

    • D. G.

      I read your mocking post (the one in reply to me). I doubt that you’ve ever actually confessed you are a sinner in need of savoir. Your user name is fraudulent.

      • X-Christian

        No matter.
        I hear that God will not be mocked.
        But that is always said AFTER god has been mocked. LOL!

    • jean

      “…insists that everyone else accept the claims” Exactly who do you mean? What religion ” insists..”.? How does that relate to Gordon College? Who is “everyone else”? Overstated??

  • jean

    Jonathan, a few corrections needed.

    1. Gordon College is NOT a” federal contractor” which Obama’s EO refers to. so your federal money talk is phony. Federal money to Gordon comes in the form of loans and grants (i.e. Pell) given to STUDENTS to be used at their chosen institution. Otherwise no” federal money” is supporting the college as you say. This is stated on the website to which you provided a link.
    2. The Salem mayor ended the town’s relationship with Gordon a month early to make a point of Salem’s own policies
    .

TOP