Over 300 women have resigned from the Labour Party over its position on allowing men who say they are women to be on all-women shortlists.
Labour says that the shortlists are open “to all women, including trans women; and that trans women do not need a gender recognition certificate to participate”.
In a letter to The Times, women leading the large-scale exit said they were “dismayed” at Labour’s position, and told other news sources they “cannot continue to be in a party which takes women for granted”.
The women stated: “We now face a situation in which any man can simply claim to be a woman and be included on all-women shortlists.
“Sex is not a self-defined characteristic and it is disingenuous for Labour to pretend that it is.”
They also particularly objected to the Party’s decision to make the change “without any debate or consultation with women members”.
One of the women leaving the party, Jennifer Isaacson, said she was “horrified” by what is happening to women’s rights in Labour, but that she was pleased there were so many showing their resistance.
“Sex is not a self-defined characteristic”Letter to the Labour Party
She lamented that while all-women shortlists used to be the preserve of women: “We could now see those places go to people who have spent the majority of their lives living as men.”
She added: “We all know sex is not a self-identifying characteristic, we all know what a woman is and this is the wilful denial of reality.”
Earlier this year, Labour suspended two members for declaring that men who say they are women are still men.
Jennifer James began a campaign to force Labour to back down after it allowed men who self-identify as women to feature on all-women shortlists.
She was targeted by an online group calling itself Labour Against Transphobia, and subsequently received a letter informing her of her suspension from the Labour Party.
Venice Allan, another party member who backed the legal action, was also suspended in similar circumstances, with one of the reasons being that she posted a photo which read: “Trans women are men” on social media.
Several so-called “drag queens” in the United Kingdom are organizing a protest to coincide with President Trump’s visit to the country in July as they believe he hasn’t lived up to his campaign promise to be “gay friendly.”
“Calling all drag kings, queens, queers and our allies to march against President Donald Trump’s UK visit,” a description reads on the protest Facebook page. “Due to the appalling way the Trump administration has regarded the rights and welfare of LGBTQI communities of the US, the idea of a Trump visit to the UK is unacceptable.”
The event is organized by several local drag queens, or men who dress as women for entertainment purposes, including Cheddar Gorgeous, Violet Blonde, Licorice Black and Jonny Banks.
UK news site The Guardian recently published an article written by “Cheddar Gorgeous” to outline why he is calling for a protest. Among his reasons include the Trump administration’s reinstatement of the ban on “transgenders” in the military, to supporting the Masterpiece Cakeshop in its case before the U.S. Supreme Court, to deciding not to recognize last June as Pride Month.
“This [protest] is to increase awareness of the way Trump’s administration has systematically attacked the LGBTQI community and to stand in solidarity with the many other groups who feel marginalized along lines of race, class and gender. To not object to the visit would seem like a betrayal of the tolerant society that the UK as a whole strives to be,” Cheddar wrote.
He said that those in drag have long been involved in political issues, from the 1960’s Stonewall riot to fundraising for HIV charities.
“By pushing the way that we look to the extremes, we are showing that we are not ashamed to be different—we are proud of our differentness,” Cheddar said. “Most important of all, we are showing that the UK is a place that is not ashamed to celebrate the diversity of its people. If we can be accepted as the extreme glittery spectacles that we are, then it just might make it easier for everyone else to be themselves, too
Over 1,000 people have stated on the event page that they plan to attend the drag queen protest.
As previously reported, during his RNC acceptance speech in July 2016, Trump told those gathered that he would work to protect homosexuals if elected.
“As president, I will do everything in my power to protect LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology,” he declared, being met with applause.
“And, I have to say, as a Republican, it is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said,” he said in response.
Trump had also declared at a fundraiser in June of that same year that he is the best candidate for the “gay community.”
“So you tell me, who’s better for the gay community, and who’s better for women than Donald Trump? Believe me!” he said.
“Show your pride and your support for Trump with this exclusive equality tee,” the store page for the t-shirt, available as the “Trump pride men’s tee,” read.
In January, he signed a letter congratulating the homosexual group Log Cabin Republicans for its 40th year, and on Thursday, Vice President Mike Pence swore in Rick Grenell, an open homosexual, to serve as the U.S. ambassador to Germany.
Proverbs 14:34 states, “Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.”
The late preacher A.W. Tozer also once said, “There is no Christian victory or blessing if we refuse to turn away from the things that God hates. Even if it is accepted in the whole social class of which you are a part, turn away from it. Even if there is something that has come to be accepted by our generation, turn away from it if it is wrong and an offense to our holy and righteous Savior.”
Most religious groups now support the legalization of same-sex marriage, according to a study released Tuesday (May 1) from the Public Religion Research Institute. The survey, which was based on more than 40,000 responses collected during 2017, finds that twice as many Americans now support same-sex marriage as oppose it, 61 percent to 30 percent.
Not surprisingly, support is strongest among members of religious groups that tend to be politically liberal, such as Jews (77 percent), the unaffiliated (80 percent) and Unitarians (an overwhelming 97 percent).
What is more surprising is how quickly support for same-sex marriage has grown among religious groups that are more politically diverse. Two-thirds of Catholics, Orthodox Christians and white mainline Protestants now say they are in favor.
What’s more, majority support now includes African-Americans, whose support for same-sex marriage has increased from 41 percent in 2013 to 52 percent today. Hispanic Americans also saw double-digit increases, with support rising from 51 percent in 2013 to 61 percent today.
Majorities of Americans in most states support same-sex marriage, with the exceptions all located in the South. Even in the handful of states that do not have more than 50 percent support for same-sex marriage, they also don’t have 50 percent opposition; Alabama is now the only state where a majority of residents say they oppose same-sex marriage.
SUPPORT GROWING MORE SLOWLY AMONG MORMONS AND EVANGELICALS
While support is robust among most religious groups, white evangelicals and Mormons remain holdouts and do not express majority support for same-sex marriage: 40 percent of Mormons and just 34 percent of white evangelicals say they are in favor.
On the other hand, “there is evidence that even these groups are trending toward majority support,” says PRRI.
For one thing, opposition has decreased by double digits in both groups since 2013, and is now at 58 percent among white evangelicals and 53 percent among Mormons. A few years ago, opposition had broad support among both groups – 71 percent of evangelicals and 68 percent of Mormons said no to same-sex marriage.
For another, the trend lines are clear that younger evangelicals and Mormons are significantly more supportive than their elders. Among evangelicals, for example, twice as many young adults favor same-sex marriage (53 percent) as those over 65 (25 percent). Mormon millennials also showed majority support (52 percent) compared with Mormons over age 65 (32 percent).
Members of most religious groups said business owners should not get to choose which clients to serve. This was particularly true among black Protestants, 65 percent of whom say that business owners should not have the option of denying service to LGBT customers.
Again, Mormons and evangelicals are the outliers. In both groups, 53 percent say that business owners should have the right to refuse service to gay and lesbian couples.
On a separate question, every religious group had a majority supporting nondiscrimination measures that provide equal legal protections to LGBT people. The lowest was among white evangelical Protestants, at just 54 percent support, and the highest among Unitarians, at 95 percent.
Mormons, the study pointed out, are unique in the large gap that exists between their views on different, but related, issues covered in the survey.
“Only 40 percent of Mormons favor allowing same-sex couples to marry, yet nearly 7 in 10 (69 percent) support laws that would protect LGBT people from discrimination in housing, public accommodations, and employment — a 29-point gap,” according to the report. “Among no other major religious group is the gap on these two issues larger.”
The margin of error for the entire sample is plus or minus 1.2 percentage points.
From Assembly bills that are trying to silence the voice of truth to legislation that limits parental rights and seeks to promote perverted sex education, we are at the crossroads: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil” (Isa. 5:20a).
Google “California school district says parents can’t pull kids from new LGBT sex ed,” and you can read the alarming article for yourself. A “toolkit” that offers kids tips on using sex toys and doing things that cannot be written in this article is one of the controversial aspects, and parents may not be able to opt out. Our arrogance as a state, and as a nation, is appalling. School districts throughout California should be held accountable. I pray that school districts don’t cave into political correctness; difference makers should make a difference. Many would rather save their job then protect children. God help us!
You may say, “Times change.” And you are correct, but God’s standards do not change. The sin that once amazed us now amuses us; just look at what is considered “entertainment” today. When sin begins to amuse us, we are dangerously close to the edge. No matter how many laws are passed in favor of same-sex marriage, or how many volumes of sex ed are printed, it will not change God’s mind. It’s been said that if you tell a lie long enough and often enough, people will begin to believe it. And isn’t that true?
At the time of this writing, it is said that we live in the greatest country in the world, but the success we cherish is not the result of chance. Many early Americans understood that in order for a nation to thrive and prosper, God’s Word must provide the basis for the government and the welfare of society. Just as water rapidly eroded the banks of the mighty Colorado River and created the vast Grand Canyon, America’s current belief system (relativism) has eroded her foundation and created a moral void.
This is why suicide among youth is an epidemic and school shootings are increasing—it’s not a gun problem, it’s a sin problem. People need hope not validation of their sin. Sin leads to depression, hopelessness and fear. The church is divided; no wonder America is divided as well. Here is the Fox News audio where I debate a pastor who embraces the LGBT agenda. We love those who struggle, but we also love the truth. We must speak the truth in love: radio.foxnews.com/2017/10/20/what-does-the-bible-say-about-homosexuality/.
Interestingly enough, the stability of America is one of the top concerns on the minds of many today. There was a time in recent history when America felt secure, knowing that the most formidable enemies were abroad. Not so today. While we are concerned with terrorist attacks, and rightly so, there is a greater threat from corruption within. We, like the mighty Roman Empire that collapsed centuries ago, are crumbling from within.
There are people and groups who are strongly committed to the destruction of anything rooted in our nation’s Christian heritage. They attempt to be “one nation ‘above’ God,” rather than “one nation ‘under’ God.” Scripture identifies this as foolishness, self-exaltation and arrogance—the downfall of nations.
There is a saying that one generation plants trees for the next generation. I’m concerned that instead of planting, we are removing and destroying the very covering that protects us. As a result, our legacy as a great and noble nation has all but been forgotten. For instance, most schools no longer teach students about the spiritual foundation that has guided America throughout her history. Consequently, America’s moral and religious heritage is often deleted, grossly distorted or revised altogether. As a result, students often miss the critical connection between America’s unparalleled greatness, her rise to world leadership and the spiritual foundation that made it possible. This should concern us. The ideas of the classroom in one generation will create the ideas of government within the next.
Today, our culture promotes relativism, and man does what is right in his own eyes. Again, according to Scripture, to his own destruction. God’s Word says to confront, confess and turn from our sins; relativism encourages us to ignore, overlook and continue in them.
Although this position may seem radical or extreme, we are living in extremely critical times. Make no mistake about it—we are witnessing the rapid deterioration of a nation right before our eyes. But there is hope: 2 Chronicles 7:14 calls out from the past with resounding clarity to America today: “If My people, who are called by My name, will humble themselves and pray, and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”
There are times to encourage, motivate and uplift, but there are also times to confront, challenge, and contend for what is right—that time is now. Let it not be said of us today: “And after them grew up a generation who did not know the Lord or the deeds that He had done for Israel” (Judg. 2:10).
As the moral and cultural war rages between our shores, the need to be awakened from our spiritual slumber has never been greater. “Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is tested” (Martin Luther). This battle is for the very soul of our nation. It’s our choice—stand or fall.
Girl Guide leaders are protesting against new rules allowing boys who claim to be girls to share changing rooms, tents and shower facilities with girls.
Guidance released by Girlguiding UK last year says biological males can “use the facilities of the gender that they self-identify as”.
It also advises leaders not to inform parents if their daughter will be sharing facilities with a boy. Some leaders say girls’ concerns are being overlooked.
Twenty leaders have written to Girlguiding’s headquarters to challenge the rules, which apply to all girl guides aged 5 to 25, but they say they have been ignored.
Helen Watts, one of the leaders defending girls’ safety, said the emphasis is being placed on the demands of trans activists “and not on the needs and views of the other girls”.
Parents Lindsay and Richard are uncomfortable with the pressure being put on girls ahead of their daughter going away on her first camp.
“You are putting the onus on a young girl to say whether or not she is uncomfortable sharing with a boy”, they said. “It could lead to her being labelled transphobic if she says she is unhappy.”
The guidelines came under fierce criticism when they were released, with feminist campaigner Julie Bindel saying: “This signifies the end to girl-only space and the safety of girls in single-sex organisations.”
An Argentinian man has legally changed his gender so that he can retire five years early and has rebuffed critics by saying he does not have to “explain anything to anyone”.
Sergio Lazarovich, a tax worker, is 60 years old, and laws in the country state that men must be 65 to receive a state pension. Women are allowed to draw their pension at 60.
A family member has said Sergio is simply cheating the pension system.
Describing his decision as a “totally selfish and harmful act”, the anonymous relative told a local Argentinian newspaper: “It saddens me to be related to a person capable of stooping so low to get what he wants.
“He is taking advantage of the law.”
Head of the local civil registry, Matias Assennato, added: “This is a clear case of misuse of retirement rights and of the law on gender identity”.
Sergio has claimed that his decision is personal and he does “not have to explain anything to anyone”. Once his pension application is received, officials say it will be up to lawyers to decide whether or not it is legitimate.
The UK Government announced last year that the Gender Recognition Act would be reviewed, saying medical checks should be removed to allow for the legal ‘self-declaration’ of gender.
Both Prime Minister Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have spoken out in favour of such plans – with the Labour leader saying he wanted people to be able to ‘self-identify’ their sex.
But women’s groups, therapists, doctors, academics, campaigners and transgender activists have challenged politicians over the idea.
The plans have been delayed in England and Wales but Scotland is pressing ahead with the issue.
Daughter to ‘son’
The fifth Earl of Balfour suggested last November that after his death, one of his daughters could declare herself to be male in order to receive his title and inherit the family home.
The Earl has four daughters and no sons. According to the law of primogeniture, his title would pass on to his younger brother.
In a letter to The Times, the Earl suggested that his daughter could claim his title “as a son” by declaring “that there has always been a man screaming to get out of her female body”.
“What is there to stop someone from changing gender and taking a title? I think it would be interesting question for constitutional lawyers”, he told The Telegraph.
Pro-abortionists in Germany have been accused by the Minister for Health of putting animal rights above the rights of unborn children.
Jens Spahn made the comments as he spoke out against calls to lift the country’s ban on allowing doctors to advertise abortion services.
Opponents attacked him on the grounds that abortion was an ‘extraneous topic’.
Spahn said: “Some of those who now want to promote abortions are uncompromising enough when it comes to animal rights”.
He added that “in this debate they no longer take into account that it’s a question of human life”.
Spahn has been tipped as a possible successor to Angela Merkel as Chancellor of Germany.
A similar argument was made about abortion in the UK in a recent article for The Spectator, entitled: ‘Why are animals more important than unborn children?’.
Ross Clark highlighted that there have been “animal laws by the dozen” over the past twenty years but there is “an utter refusal on the part of our main political parties” to even discuss the issue of abortion.
“There seems to be an unwritten rule in politics that the issue must not be discussed, and that anyone holding views which are disapproving of current practice on abortion must be dismissed as an extremist”.
1967 Abortion Act
Clark continued: “This is in spite of obvious evidence that abortion as conducted in Britain is completely at odds with the word of the law.
“Under the 1967 act that legalised abortion, it is clearly stated that it is only supposed to be used in situations where the mother’s physical or mental health is at risk or if the baby were to be born seriously handicapped.
“Few would even pretend that abortion is being restricted to these cases.”
Industrial scale destruction
He asked how the public can be so concerned about protecting animals, “yet seem blithely indifferent about the industrial-scale destruction of human foetuses?”
“I find it extraordinary that so many of us apparently value the lives of furry creatures over those of humans”.
INDIANA, Pa. — A student at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania says he was kicked out of his religious studies course for contending in class that there are only two genders and for providing his views when his professor had asked to hear from women only.
Lake Ingle says that on Feb. 28, his class was shown a TED Talk recording of former church planter and pastor Paul Williams, who now goes by the name Paula, as he discussed “mansplaining,” “male privilege,” and male sexism. The video was part of a study on “Christianity 481: Self, Sin, and Salvation,” and was entitled “I’ve lived as a man & a woman—here’s what I learned.”
Ingle states that at the end of the recording, his female professor asked for comment from women only. After no girls in the class sought to speak, he decided to provide his point of view, stating that biologists believe that there are only two biological genders. He also outlined why he disagrees that there is a wage gap between men and women.
“The floor was opened, and not a single woman spoke. Thirty seconds or so passed and still no woman had spoken. So, I decided it was permissible for me to enter the conversation, especially because I felt the conversation itself was completely inappropriate in its structure,” Ingle recalled to Campus Reform. “It was during my objection that Dr. [Alison] Downie attempted to silence me because I am not a woman.”
The following day, in meeting with his professor, he was provided with an Academic Integrity Referral Form and an agreement, outlining that Downie wanted Ingle to apologize to the entire class and then listen as his professor—and any students that wished to—outlined how his choice to speak out made her feel.
Ingle is officially accused of “[d]isrespectful objection to the professor’s class discussion structure; refusal to stop talking out of turn; angry outbursts in response to being required to listen to a trans speaker discuss the reality of white male privilege and sexism; disrespectful references to the validity of trans identity and experience; [and making a] disrespectful claim that a low score on any class work would be evidence of professor’s personal prejudice.”
Days later, he received a letter from Provost Timothy Moerland advising him that Downie wanted him removed from the class.
“Due to the serious nature of this issue, you are barred from attending this class in accordance with the Classroom Disruption policy,” Moerland wrote. “You will not be allowed to return to class until the pending academic integrity charges against you are fully adjudicated.”
Ingle believes that the university is infringing upon his right to free speech and to present ideas that differ with what is being indoctrinated by his professor.
“My professor pretty much just tried to shut me up because she was just letting women speak,” he told Fox News. “I brought up the fact that biologists don’t agree that there’s more than two genders and I said the wage gap she’s referring to—77 cents on the dollar—that even the New York Times debunked that.”
Ingle, who now has obtained legal representation, also told Campus Reform that “the wording in the [accusatory] documents is not only exaggerated, but more than one line is entirely untruthful and is done so purposefully to discredit my views and paint me as intolerant and ignorant.”
He said that he is not seeking to prove his views correct in fighting the charges, but is rather wanting to defend the right to disagree. Ingle, a senior, also needs to be able to complete the course in order to graduate.
The Trump administration is being accused of racism for targeting an Obama-era directive compelling schools to ease up on discipline for minority students — even though the policy has made life more difficult for kids, including minorities, stuck in increasingly unruly classrooms.
Ask Virginia Walden Ford, who runs a church-based after-school snack program in Little Rock. She was recently surprised when a young, fearful black girl turned up before the end of the school day and admitted she had skipped class.
Why? She had been involved in a fight the day before with another girl, but the school had refused to suspend her assailant, and she worried that the girl would try to pick a fight with her again.
“She had been continually bullied all year long,” recalled Ms. Ford, an EdChoice board member. “My advice was, ‘Talk to your counselor, teacher, parents,’ but she made it really, really clear to me that day that that’s not doing any good. Her school does not want to suspend students. They’re trying to keep the suspension rate down.”
The girl isn’t alone. Critics of the 2014 Dear Colleague — an advisory on non-discriminatory school discipline, issued by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights — say the policy has been enormously successful in reducing suspensions and expulsions, but it’s also made schools more chaotic, even dangerous.
Those kind of things are changing the environment of the school so that kids who need to feel safe, kids who really, really want to learn, we’re seeing higher dropout rates,” said Ms. Ford, who spoke at a March 12 Heritage Foundation forum. “We’re seeing kids staying home. It’s a battleground for children instead of a safe haven for children. And we’ve seen it since the Obama administration policy.”
Manhattan Institute senior fellow Max Eden cited an analysis released in December by the Philadelphia public schools showing that truancy rates, after ticking down for years, have skyrocketed, along with “serious misbehavior and declining achievement.”
“Evidence is mounting that efforts to fight the school-to-prison pipeline is creating a school climate catastrophe and has if anything put at-risk students at greater risk,” said Mr. Eden at a Dec. 8 hearing of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Accusations of racism
Even so, efforts to dismantle or scale back the Obama-era policy have been met with accusations of racism from advocates of “restorative justice,” as evidenced most recently by the reaction to the Trump administration’s recent school-safety initiative.
The White House unveiled March 12 an immediate action plan to “secure our schools” after last month’s deadly Parkland school shooting as well as the formation of the Federal Commission on School Safety, chaired by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.
The commission was charged with making recommendations on a dozen “areas of focus,” including “repeal of the Obama administration’s ‘Rethink School Discipline’ policies,” prompting a flurry of media criticism.
“When Republicans Go After Children of Color, Democrats Need to Fight Back,” said the Washington Monthly headline on a March 14 column by Nancy LeTourneau.
“In a sick irony, some on the right would use the recent school shooting in Parkland, Fla. — allegedly committed by a young man who carved swastikas into the magazines for his semiautomatic rifle — as a pretext to roll back civil rights protections for students of color,” said New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg in a March 12 op-ed.
During her rocky “60 Minutes” interview on March 11, Ms. DeVos received an earful from host Lesley Stahl on why she shouldn’t repeal the policy.
“Yeah, but let’s say there’s a disruption in the classroom and a bunch of white kids are disruptive and they get punished, you know, go see the principal,” said Ms. Stahl. “But the black kids are, you know — they call in the cops. I mean, that’s the issue: Who and how the kids who disrupt are being punished.”
There’s no question that black students are suspended and expelled at higher rates than other students, in some cases two to three times higher, a “disparate impact” that the Obama administration attributed to the unconscious or conscious bias of teachers and administrators.
The 2014 policy came in part in reaction to the “zero tolerance” policies adopted in the 1990s, which required expelling students for certain violations but fell out of favor amid reports of severe punishments for relatively innocuous behavior.
Critics argue that the racial disparity exists even in schools run by predominantly black principals and staff, and that the cure — doing everything possible to avoid suspending or expelling minority kids — has hurt other minority students and pushed schools to adopt illegal race-based discipline quotas under threat of a federal investigation.
In a Jan. 19 study, University of San Diego Law School professor Gail Heriot and Alison Somin argued that the Obama discipline policy had “contributed to the problem of disorderly classrooms, especially in schools with high minority enrollment.”
“Those who cry ‘racism’ at the Trump administration for even considering the repeal of the Dear Colleague letter need to stop and think,” said Ms. Heriot, a U.S. civil-rights commissioner. “Minority students — those who are trying to learn amid increasing classroom chaos — are the primary victims of the Obama-era policy.”
At the December commission hearing, former Obama administration officials argued that “exclusionary discipline” has contributed to the “school to prison pipeline” by depriving students of the tools they need to succeed.
Commissioner Peter Kirsanow asked them to respond to 2014 federal figures showing that 2.8 million students reported missing school in the last 30 days for fear of being assaulted by students in their class.
Former Education Department senior policy adviser Kristen Harper described that as the wrong focus.
“We do ourselves a disservice and really sort of steer the conversation in the wrong direction when we try to say, ‘Well, what is the impact of the disruptive students on the non-disruptive students?’” said Ms. Harper. “Instead, our conversation really should focus on how we support educators and support schools.”
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — A United Methodist clergy woman in Tennessee has had her ministerial license revoked for officiating a same-sex “wedding” in violation of the UMC’s Book of Discipline.
The Holston Conference of the United Methodist Church withdrew the license of Anna Golladay, associate pastor at both St. Marks and St. Elmo United Methodist in Chattanooga, on Feb. 28.
Golladay said that she knew the Book of Discipline prohibited leaders from conducting same-sex ceremonies, but did it anyway.
“Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches,” section 341.6 reads.
The Book of Discipline also requires its leaders to personally “maintain the highest standards of holy living in the world.”
“If I am going to step out in faith knowing that I am potentially crossing a line based on the rules of a man-made book, I wanted to be intentional about that,” Golladay told local television station WTVC. “I wanted to be sure that it was exactly what God intended me to do.”
“I very intentionally agreed to this wedding because I believed wholly in my call to be their pastor,” she said.
Both congregations are open and affirming of homosexuals.
District Superintendent Randy Martin learned of the matter after being provided with a photo of the event and advised that it was Golladay who officiated the ceremony. Golladay was subsequently contacted about the matter, and as she confirmed that she was indeed involved, he submitted the information to the Scenic South District Committee on Ministry.
The Committee then voted to revoke her license, the announcement of which was made on March 4.
According to the United Methodist News Service, Martin said that Golladay may still continue to be a member of the two locations and is free to be involved in any activities.
One member of St. Elmo, who identifies as a homosexual and is the chair of the Staff-Parish Relations Committee, told reporters that he wants the prohibition removed from the Book of Discipline.
“We do understand that it is in the Book of Discipline, that is was wrong, but the Book of Discipline needs to be changed,” he told WTVC, claiming that Golladay was only doing God’s work.
However, as previously reported, Christians believe that sexual relations between those of the same sex are clearly prohibited by God’s immutable moral laws, and that all men are born with sinful inclinations that are a distortion from God’s original design at Creation. The sinful nature of man is why Jesus said in John 3:3, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.”
“After Paul had reviewed his catalog of sin and warned that those who give themselves to such sins will not inherit the Kingdom of God, he turned to the Church and reminded Christians, ‘Such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God’ (1 Corinthians 6:11),” writes Albert Mohler, as published on DesiringGod.com.
“This text declares that Christians, saved by the grace of God, are those who have come out of these patterns of sin, who have been justified, and whom the Holy Spirit progressively conforms to the image of the Lord Jesus Christ,” he explains.
Mohler says that this gospel hope of regeneration and rebirth for all men—no matter what the sin—is, of course, not proclaimed by the secular world.
“This message of transformation by the grace of God—the presentation of atonement and redemption in full biblical glory—stands in stark contrast to the message homosexuals are given by the secular world. Therapists, sexologists, physiologists, and sociologists say to homosexuals, ‘This is who you are. Just claim your identity as a homosexual man or woman and press for full rights in the normalization of your lifestyle,’” he laments.
“Christians have no right to excise homosexuality from the Bible, but our ultimate purpose is to move from the diagnosis of sin to the power of the gospel. We are the people who know that Christ has won the victory,” Mohler exhorts.
“The God of the Bible is not only clear in judgment, but powerful to save. The Church must declare without reservation the Bible’s doctrine of regeneration. This is not a self-help program or a mere sexual recovery program—it is a comprehensive program of transformation as the dead are made alive. The old things have passed away even as all things become new.”