If lying publicly meant as much to the newly-public Lakeland Christian as hating gay fellow citizens, LCS leaders would punish Canady like they did Lakeland Mayor Bill Mutz.
Even granting that Canady gave false witness during her campaign (which I think is far from certain), is your understanding of LCS’s statement of faith that its faculty are expected to live a sinless life?
My understanding is that LCS used that oath to force my mayor out of its community because he was too nice to Lakeland’s gay people. Its my understanding that JC has made no effort to repent for her false testimony about forced birth or swear off public lying in the future. It is my understanding that LCS is now a public school that would deny me or my children access to its publicly-funded community (not that I want to be a part of it.) Are any of those understandings incorrect? Are any of those understandings consistent with expecting someone “to live a sinless life.” Those are pretty simple yes or no questions. Now that I’ve answered yours; I’d like to see you answer mine.
I don’t think the comparison with Mayor Mutz is accurate.... He was asked to resign because they felt like the views he expressed were not consistent with the views they held as an organization, not for any suggestion of sinful actions, as you are imputing to Canady.
As for repentance, it would be inappropriate for her to repent if she did not believe she had spoken falsely, even if you think she did. I think she answered the question in a way that would allow he flexibility on the subject. I’m sure there are plenty of possible circumstances that would have disuaded her from introducing this bill, and so therefore her statement that it was something she would have to look at in the future was true. It’s not like her pro-life bona fides were in doubt at any point in the campaign....
The second question is also of questionable relevance. Just because something is “publicly funded” does not necessarily mean there can be no qualifications for participation, even religious qualifications (see Fulton v. Philadelphia). Your characterization is not inaccurate, but I don’t think it had the relevance that you seem to think it does.
If you had been able to get her on record saying, “I will not support shortening the window in which women can get abortions,” I would be right with you. If you want to write about why shortening that window is bad on the merits, there are valid arguments to be made. But I just don’t see the hypocrisy that you are claiming this example illustrates.
I was interested in persuasion and compromise and sharing space before Jan. 6, forced-birth, and the CCDF. Now I’m just interested in fighting and winning the war declared on normal people. And in forcing people to choose sides in it. I know what side LCS is as a power institution in that war, which it declared on all of us who differ from it. What side are you on? When we win the war for shared space we can talk about how to share it. But you have to want to share space.
Lol, sure. The noted forced birth/give 8k to rich people exception to the
10 Commandments and infallible word of God. Take up the meaning of lying with God. His rules, supposedly. But you’re factually incorrect, I think. Bill was asked to leave for violating the oath -- not views being “inconsistent with the views they held as on org.” If I’m wrong, name the specific “view” that got him booted? Just being too nice to gay people? Man, y’all are a fabulous advertisement for Jesus. Lol.
I have nothing to do with LCS. And it’s fine if you aren’t interested in persuasion; if you just want to use this space to vent your spleen that’s certainly your prerogative. Sorry to intrude.
https://harpers.org/archive/2023/03/ron-desantis-force-feedings-guantanamo-bay-laughing/
Even granting that Canady gave false witness during her campaign (which I think is far from certain), is your understanding of LCS’s statement of faith that its faculty are expected to live a sinless life?
My understanding is that LCS used that oath to force my mayor out of its community because he was too nice to Lakeland’s gay people. Its my understanding that JC has made no effort to repent for her false testimony about forced birth or swear off public lying in the future. It is my understanding that LCS is now a public school that would deny me or my children access to its publicly-funded community (not that I want to be a part of it.) Are any of those understandings incorrect? Are any of those understandings consistent with expecting someone “to live a sinless life.” Those are pretty simple yes or no questions. Now that I’ve answered yours; I’d like to see you answer mine.
I don’t think the comparison with Mayor Mutz is accurate.... He was asked to resign because they felt like the views he expressed were not consistent with the views they held as an organization, not for any suggestion of sinful actions, as you are imputing to Canady.
As for repentance, it would be inappropriate for her to repent if she did not believe she had spoken falsely, even if you think she did. I think she answered the question in a way that would allow he flexibility on the subject. I’m sure there are plenty of possible circumstances that would have disuaded her from introducing this bill, and so therefore her statement that it was something she would have to look at in the future was true. It’s not like her pro-life bona fides were in doubt at any point in the campaign....
The second question is also of questionable relevance. Just because something is “publicly funded” does not necessarily mean there can be no qualifications for participation, even religious qualifications (see Fulton v. Philadelphia). Your characterization is not inaccurate, but I don’t think it had the relevance that you seem to think it does.
If you had been able to get her on record saying, “I will not support shortening the window in which women can get abortions,” I would be right with you. If you want to write about why shortening that window is bad on the merits, there are valid arguments to be made. But I just don’t see the hypocrisy that you are claiming this example illustrates.
I was interested in persuasion and compromise and sharing space before Jan. 6, forced-birth, and the CCDF. Now I’m just interested in fighting and winning the war declared on normal people. And in forcing people to choose sides in it. I know what side LCS is as a power institution in that war, which it declared on all of us who differ from it. What side are you on? When we win the war for shared space we can talk about how to share it. But you have to want to share space.
That’s unfortunate, because I used to find you very persuasive.
Lol, sure. The noted forced birth/give 8k to rich people exception to the
10 Commandments and infallible word of God. Take up the meaning of lying with God. His rules, supposedly. But you’re factually incorrect, I think. Bill was asked to leave for violating the oath -- not views being “inconsistent with the views they held as on org.” If I’m wrong, name the specific “view” that got him booted? Just being too nice to gay people? Man, y’all are a fabulous advertisement for Jesus. Lol.
Also, let me clear how little I care if you or anyone else is “with me.” I’ll tell you the truth as I see it and you decide what to do with it.
Hating gay people is much more important to LCS than lying. I get it. Just own it.
I have nothing to do with LCS. And it’s fine if you aren’t interested in persuasion; if you just want to use this space to vent your spleen that’s certainly your prerogative. Sorry to intrude.