Comments on: Equal rights Q&A

By: Doug

Doug — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:06:27 +0000

When two adults love each other, it should never be labeled as deviant.

If you cannot tell the difference between two adults expressing feelings for each other and pedophiles, you have a lot to learn about human nature, and what it means to be a consenting adult.

By: web

web — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:31:12 +0000

The problem with your examples about Exxon, the NAACP, or Earth Liberation Front is the assumption that just because these have nothing to do with sexual preferences illustrates that there are no illustrations that have to do deal with sexual preferences. What if the rentor / neighbor or potential employee at a day care center or applicant at Chuck E. Cheese was wearing a NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association) t-shirt? What about a t-shirt representing BashBack, a militant pro-homosexual group? Would you hire a known sex offender to care for your young children while you are at work? ALL of these have to do with sexual conduct.

By making behavior a civil rights issue you open the door for any other deviant behavior being the basis for civil rights protection.

If you base their protected class on their behavior, what is to keep pedophiles or child pornographers or NAMBLA members from petitioning their local governing bodies for protection based on their behavior? Never happen? Who would have ever thought, 50 years ago, that we would be having this discussion about homosexuality today? Now extrapolate that 50 years into the future and tell me what doors will be open then?

Human behavior should never be the basis for civil rights protection because of the Pandor’s Box that it opens.

By: Hannah

Hannah — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 03:57:13 +0000

Mr. Flynn,

Thank you so much for the excellent post. Your point about religious organizations claiming the right to discriminate was very well put, as was your point about the “gay is a choice” argument. Overall, you seem to be passionate about equality and honest dialogue, which bodes very well for the future of Anchorage.

By: Deanna

Deanna — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:39:10 +0000

Mr. Flynn,

You are to be commended for taking the time to post your view on this blog. You mention that “prior to Mr. Minnery’s post I’d never heard of either organization he mentions”. In addition to those organizations, you could also check out NARTH.com

NARTH is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality. As an organization, we disseminate educational information, conduct and collect scientific research, promote effective therapeutic treatment, and provide referrals to those who seek our assistance. NARTH upholds the rights of individuals with unwanted homosexual attraction to receive effective psychological care and the right of professionals to offer that care.

The last sentence of your blog was the most encouraging. If you truly value a thoughtful, respectful debate and are unfamiliar with organizations (sectarian and non-sect.) which exist to help gays who desire to leave the homosexual lifestyle, than you have yet to show you have engaged in thoughtful, respectful debate. Voting on the basis of a crowded, emotion-laden hearing is not give evidence that your practices are based on your values.

Again, thank you for providing this format. Please vote your values, and vote against this ordinance until there HAS been a “thoughtful, respectful” public debate.

By: Mel Green

Mel Green — Sat, 30 May 2009 06:10:36 +0000

And in fact it seems that neither Hyles Anderson College nor Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary offer Doctor of Divinity degree programs. Which means that both degrees were honoraries.

By: Mel Green

Mel Green — Sat, 30 May 2009 05:57:54 +0000

Paul, according to “The Complete Book of Church Growth” (PDF file) by Elmer Towns, in a chapter originally written in 1975 about Prevo and ABT, Hyles Anderson College awarded a (honorary) Doctor of Divinity degree to Prevo in 1974. Although it was an honorary degree, the awarder, Dr. Jack Hyles, claimed it was the equivalent of an earned degree — essentially because of the work Prevo had done to that point to increase ABT’s membership. The info page about Prevo at the ABT website puts the date of that honorary DD degree in 1978. That page also says he got a DD from Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary in 1993 — I don’t know if he actually did any work there either or if it’s also an honorary — but according to some prelim research on the internet, most DDs in the U.S. are honorary degrees. Whereas in the U.K., a DD actually means that one has done academic work such as a work of theological scholarship to earn the degree.

I don’t tend to call Prevo Doctor either, on the basis of honorary degrees — I might be persuaded to if I can see he actually did the work that a truly earned academic degree requires. If he didn’t… well.

But as someone who works in an academic and research unit at UAA (the Justice Center), I can assure you that it is common practice for people who have earned Ph.D.’s to be addressed as “Dr.” But the profs where I work actually did the works of scholarship necessary to earn those degrees. (People who have earned law degrees, called the Juris Doctorate or J.D., however, are NOT typically addressed as “Dr.” The two profs we have who have J.D.s are addressed as “Professor.”)

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 29 May 2009 18:48:51 +0000

Well put Patrick. Perhaps you could answer me this question. Why does Rev Prevo refer to himself as Doctor. Is he an M.D. In most caseds people with Doctorates do not tefer to themselves as Doctor, and neither do we. I think in this particular case it is rather insidious in that it disquises his role as a extremist religious leader (ok I guess he blew his cover a long time ago) but even more misleading the term doctor gives the impression that he is a man of science and therefore a reputable source of opinion in matters requiring empirical analysis.
Maybe I am blowing this out of proportion but I for one refuse to call him Doctor, is no doctor. My Father was a minister with a Doctorate and he called himself (and so did everyone else) Reverend.