Tag Archives: dan brown

Do you still think this issue won’t affect you?

Proponents of square circles (oops, I mean “same-sex marriage”) often mock their opponents by asking how it would hurt them.  Here’s another example of how the radical LGBTQXX agenda can impact you: Gay manager at Cisco Systems gets Dr. Frank Turek fired.  He wasn’t fired for anything he said at work, but because one person was offended that Turek had written separately that real marriage was the ideal.

Dr. Mike Adams explains how a gay manager at Cisco Systems got Dr. Frank Turek fired for opposing same-sex marriage. Adams explains what happened in a letter addressed to the President of Cisco.

Excerpt:

I want to bring to your attention a recent decision made by your HR team that I think does not reflect your leadership of Cisco.Dr. Frank Turek was fired as a vendor for his political and religious views, even though those views were never mentioned or expressed during his work at Cisco.

[…]In 2008, Dr. Turek was hired by Cisco to design and conduct a leadership and teambuilding program for about fifty managers with your Remote Operations Services team. The program took about a year to conduct, during which he also conducted similar sessions for another business unit within Cisco. That training earned such high marks that in 2010 he was asked to design a similar program for about 200 managers within Global Technical Services. Ten separate eight-hour sessions were scheduled.

The morning after completing the seventh session earlier this year, a manager in that session —who was one of the better students in that class—phoned in a complaint. It had nothing to do with content of the course or how it was conducted. In fact, the manager commented that the course was “excellent” as did most who participated. His complaint regarded Dr. Turek’s political and religious views that were never mentioned during class, but that the manager learned by “googling” Dr. Turek after class.

The manager identified himself as gay and was upset that Dr. Turek had written this book providing evidence that maintaining our current marriage laws would be best for the country. Although the manager didn’t read the book, he said that the author’s view was inconsistent with “Cisco values” and could not be tolerated. (Dr. Turek is aware of this because he was in the room when his call came in.) The manager then contacted an experienced HR professional at Cisco who had Dr. Turek fired that day without ever speaking to him. The HR professional also commended the manager for “outing” Dr. Turek.

This firing had nothing to do with course content—the program earned very high marks from participants. It had nothing to do with budget constraints—the original contract was paid in full recently. A man was fired simply because of his personal political and religious beliefs—beliefs that are undoubtedly shared by thousands of your very large and diverse workforce.

You don’t see straight people complaining to HR about the political views of other employees / contractors at companies when those views aren’t expressed in their jobs.  And you definitely won’t see anyone getting fired over that.  In fact, you would be likely to be reprimanded or fired for even complaining.  Why are we letting the sexual preferences of 3% of the population have so much control?  Grow a spine, people!

I saw the Cisco article several places but like the Wintery Knight’s commentary:

And that leads me to the question that gay activists often ask supporters of traditional marriage: “how would allowing same-sex marriage hurt your marriage?”. And now we know the answer. Same-sex marriage would likely,  criminalize free speech that promotes traditional marriage over same-sex marriage, as it has in other countries with same-sex marriage, such as Canada. If you are a working husband, and you are responsible for a family, you will be under a constant threat of termination should your pro-marriage views become known to your colleagues and supervisors. Also, if you teach you children to favor traditional marriage, you may be persecuted by the state.

I would like to be able to provide for my family if I choose to marry, and I would like my children to favor traditional marriage over cohabitation, or any other arrangement, because traditional marriage is best for children who need a stable environment with two loving biological parents (if possible). But if it becomes the law that my view is “offensive” and “discriminatory”, then that would affect my marriage. Sometimes, I am very glad that I am not married, because getting married in a society that is offended by marriage takes a lot of courage. It seems to me that many Christians, especially the uninformed emotional ones who would rather read vampire fiction and Dan Brown than peer-reviewed research, prefer to redefine Christianity to mean “affirming destructive behavior so that you feel good and more people like you”.

Let Dr. Turek’s story be a lesson to all of you who prefer traditional marriage. Don’t allow your opinions on marriage to be linked to your true identity, because some sexually immoral people will try to separate you from your livelihood if they can. It’s no longer safe to express a preference for traditional marriage in this society. If you do it, you are taking chances. Just look at the vandalism and stalking of Prop 8 supporters. If you want children to grow up with a mother and a father in this society, then you are a marked target to those who put adult hedonism above the rights of children – including many Christians who enjoy singing and schmoozing in the church. Just this week I got an anguished e-mail from someone who blogs under his real name who is now in the cross-hairs for expressing his preference for traditional marriage in public.

We are in this situation because fake or wimpy Christians stood by and didn’t stand up for the obvious: Homosexual behavior is a sin and churches shouldn’t be affirming it.  If we really love people, in the sense of having their long-term best interests at heart, we won’t encourage them to participate in physically, emotionally and spiritually destructive behaviors that God plainly spoke against in his word.  And we won’t let the public schools poison the mind of 5 year olds by telling them how “normal” gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender behavior is and how they really can’t tell if they are boys or girls.

We aren’t trying to regulate the lives of gay people. They are free to have whatever adult relationships they like, including getting “married” in apostate churches.  We just disagree that the government needs to be involved in those relationships and to give civil rights status to sexual preferences.  But the LGBTQX lobby is so thin-skinned that they demand not just tolerance but acceptance.

Dan Brown’s predictable story

DaVinciBad answers from Christians don’t disprove Christianity any more than bad answers from atheists prove that there is a God.

Dan Brown is the author of The Da Vinci Code (and other works), which would have been a typical work of anti-religious fiction had he not claimed that it was historical fiction.  Either that was a lie or he is a spectacularly bad historian.  There were many serious errors that no decent historian would make.

But Dan is back, and shared the reason for his disbelief:

Interviewer: Are you religious?

Dan Brown: I was raised Episcopalian, and I was very religious as a kid. Then, in eighth or ninth grade, I studied astronomy, cosmology, and the origins of the universe. I remember saying to a minister, “I don’t get it. I read a book that said there was an explosion known as the Big Bang, but here it says God created heaven and Earth and the animals in seven days. Which is right?” Unfortunately, the response I got was, “Nice boys don’t ask that question.” A light went off, and I said, “The Bible doesn’t make sense. Science makes much more sense to me.” And I just gravitated away from religion.

It is a common story.  The movie Contact delighted in Jodie Foster’s character giving similar dramatic “evidence” that the Bible and Christianity must be wrong, even though the film makers shot themselves in the foot by insisting that design in a series of numbers was incontrovertible evidence of intelligent life.  Hey, we agree that design implies a designer!

 Gil Dodgen made a great parody of Brown’s response:

I was raised an atheist, and was very devout as a kid. I studied astronomy, cosmology, and the origins of the universe. I remember saying to a scientist, “I don’t get it. I read a book that said there was an explosion known as the Big Bang, and that all the laws of physics were fine-tuned to make life possible. Wouldn’t this require design and purpose?” Unfortunately, the response I got was, “Only mindless, uneducated religious fanatics ask that question. It was all an accident. Stop asking stupid questions.” But I wasn’t mindless, uneducated, or a religious fanatic. I was an atheist!

A light went off, and I said, “Materialism doesn’t make sense. Design and purpose in the cosmos makes much more sense to me.” And I just gravitated away from atheism.

There are poor and/or mistaken teachers in all areas.  Countless people are just looking for an excuse not to believe, but they aren’t fooling God:

Romans 1:18-20 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

The solution is to keep asking questions and for Christians to be better prepared with answers!  It is tragic how few Christians are equipped to defend their faith or to point people in the right direction for answers.

Check out the Wintery Knight for more.