"No person shall be appointed to a position if the city council finds that such person has, prior to such proposed appointment, engaged in discrimination or demonstrated a bias, by word or deed, against any person, group or organization on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, age or disability, " says the changed law.
Make no mistake - (although I am sure many will think otherwise)...I am not judging anyone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. This is not about what I think of behavior I do not participate in. This is about whether or nor is it the place of government to legislate the condoning of behavior that goes against Christian doctrine at the expense of Christian believers. Demonstrating a bias by word or deed essentially discriminates against all Christians by the mere fact of what the bible states (WORD) Leviticus 20:13 or that Christians even attend (DEED) a church that shares the teachings of the Bible and promotes traditional family values and moral behavior. This policy is rather confusing. Seems to me it would be OK to run for office or get a city contract in San Antonio if you where a 75 yr old blind black albino Brazilian of either sex and were homosexual and transgendered and had served in the military as long as you didn't attend church. As I see it, the government has removed Christianity from schools and public places and is now legislating against it as far as public service goes and using minority groups to further that agenda. Obama claims to be Christian and supposedly attends church - does that mean he can't run for mayor of San Antonio?
Make no mistake...there will be a final judge.
Ecclesiastes 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing , whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
14 comments:
Removed just Christianity?
In the past I've read some comments here from folks who think that you have taken your blog off course by discussing religious matters herein ... frequently on the Christian Sabbath--Sunday. As far as this TFL blog reader is concerned, you should maintain the blog in the manner that makes sense for you. It also appears that most readers appreciate your religious thoughts and frequent mentions of the Holy Bible. If need be, a few of the 1.8 million "hit" authors to this blog may choose to pass reading and commenting here at your blog. As for me and my household, we think you're "spot on" and hope to hear more from you on "PC" topics as moral life in this country seems to be deteriorating at a fast pace. John, keep posting His work ... it seems to be a unique part of your special calling from our beautiful desert.
Mr Wells, your blog, your words your thoughts. I for one look forward to reading your Sunday blog even though it is Monday here when you write it. Keep it up PLEASE.
You, my friend, are doing a great service, keep it up and it would be OK with me if you spread you "Sunday" blogs to every day.
It must be exhausting and mentally
debilitating playing God.
I personally love your Sunday message. What you say is who your are and you are obviously a child of the living God.
You make it sound like a Christian cant run for office now, which is not the case.
Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they are going to spread some sort of gay agenda, far from it.
Thats the great thing about our country, freedom of religion. You are free to think and practice what you want. But on the other side of the coin, that other person is free not to practice what you believe. You can not force your beliefs onto other people, and the government can not take sides. You really have to think about what was going on when the country was first founded, before the first state. People wanted to get away from a government that was controlled by religion, and was forced to follow a single religion. That is what America was truly founded on.
the issue. If you are a person who is going to administer a public function that serves a wide variety of people, cultures, beliefs, etc...
you need to do that in a way that treats everyone the same no matter your personal beliefs.
In our country, we celebrate the freedom to practice whatever religion we want, associate with whom we want, engage in relationships with those that mean something to us.
No one should feel that their chosen lifestyle is going to be discriminated against by someone who represents the govt.
it's a simple thing - and a good thing.
there was a time and there are still people who would consider John wells to be a hermit type .. to be suspicious and wary of....
I don't buy it, not an inch but I also don't buy it for others either.
San Antonio is rapidly becoming a third world socialist cesspool, our future can be seen in the remains of Detroit. As the makers flee, the takers rush in. The new rules are being written to penalize and marginalize Christians and conservatives, and to benefit those who want to live off of the largesse of those who are successful. Soon the joke will be on them. Good luck getting a job or tax money from the poor and illiterate. Sorry for the rant, but the last train is pulling out, and I want to be on it.
"engaged in discrimination or demonstrated a bias..."
If you've engaged in the above, don't apply for the job. Pretty simple. It doesn't spell the end of morality and civilization. It's just a requirement for the job. Nothing more, nothing less.
Amen
John, this is a very perceptive post, very perceptive.
djc
"This is about whether or nor is it the place of government to legislate the condoning of behavior that goes against Christian doctrine at the expense of Christian believers."
John, quite a twist of logic. How you arrive at your conclusion might be the subject of some late-night stargazing and introspection. I hope your ability to do so has not been forgotten amidst all the tongue-talking and bible-thumping, which seems to be part of the environment there, along with the heat-laden shimmering of air and the sweet kiss of rare rain.
By government legislating tolerance you somehow arrive at "condoning of behaviour". (Now I shall not defend what is indefensible of government, which comprises most of it, but some efforts are actually for the common good, and this attempt at decency seems a good try).
Your use of "behaviour" is a term that would be enriched with the clarity of definition.
Having followed you (excuse the pun) religiously since the very first of your public writing on this Field Lab experience, which has in large measure really been the John Wells experience, I have developed a certain faith (more puns) in what brought and sustained you in that harsh but beautiful desert land in the first instance: a strong, creative, wise soul. He has come through all these pages and years, but lately seems less familiar. Distant. Surrounded by guns and fear and a narrowing world view.
Perhaps this is too personal, but I do think it may be a good time to come back to the centre of things, which is you.
He's a wonderful fellow, and I think there are many among us readers who knew him.
With care,
/m
Post a Comment