Galveston has long been known to be a welcoming place for gays. So a news report causing a stir on social media and elsewhere was a bit of a surprise.

A Houston news station is reporting that a gay couple was evicted from a Galveston rental home because of their sexuality.

Here’s an excerpt from KTRK TV’s report, which does not name the rental property nor the full name of the owner, who told the news station she was within her legal and moral rights:

"The popular home renting website has banned a user after allegations surfaced that she kicked a gay couple out of the home she rented to them through the site last weekend.

"We like bed and breakfast," said Jonathan Wang. "This home was very gorgeous."

Wang said he fell in love with the Galveston home rental and quickly booked a two-night stay at about $140 a night. He said he and his partner Brent were in Galveston for a friend's wedding.

"We went in and took a tour of the house on our own. Everything looked really nice," said Wang.

After unpacking their bags and heading to the wedding reception, they returned to the bed and breakfast and began speaking to the owner.

"Heather asked me, where my wife was. Who is this person? I said it was my significant other Brent. She said I thought you were bringing a wife. I said I didn't say that specifically. I said is that going to be OK? She said. It's not," said Wang.

Wang said the hosts told them to get out. He said he began packing his things.

"She also commented while we were going upstairs that was their bedroom upstairs so they were even more uncomfortable with it," said Wang.

A short time later, Wang said he found himself out on the street with nowhere else to go. He said it was late Friday night and every hotel he called was booked."

Recommended for you

(68) comments

Mary Branum

As President of the Short Term Rental Owners Association of Galveston (STROAG), I am appalled and dismayed, that any one, publically renting a property would be so callous. I stress that STROAG does not condone this or any other discriminatory actions.

I want to make it clear this person is not a member of STROAG.

Should one choose to set their own rules, they should be made clear and concise so there is no confusion.

Galveston is a wonderful meld of all walks of life and an island that welcomes everyone. This is what makes living her so special.

Our membership strives to make all feel welcome on this island and take home the memories of a wonderful experience.

I hope these gentlemen return so we may provide them a positive experience.

Carlos Ponce

"they should be made clear and concise so there is no confusion". I guess posting "STRAIGHT" on their advertisement was not clear or concise.

Mary Branum

No it isn't. My husband and I have stayed a "gay friendly" Bed and Breakfast; we were not turned away because we are straight.

Furthermore, it was the most beautiful place we have ever stayed.

To be concise, state "straight only"!

Carlos Ponce

Maybe they thought one of you was cross dressing.[wink]

J. Shaffer

Carlos, do you think that's funny?

Carlos Ponce

One must consider all the possibilities. Since the establishment was "gay friendly" they may also accept transvestites and probably have seen it all.

Kevin Lang

Please be accurate. "Straight Friendly". What urban dictionary are you using to conjure up "Straight Friendly"="Straight Only". You're so happy to see a gay couple get their comeuppance that you are willing to overlook the dishonest representation of the accommodations by owners that were completely disregarding local ordinances.

If the place was sold as being Gays Not Allowed, sure, she might have taken some heat, but she wouldn't have been on AirBnB.

Kroger is "Straight Friendly". So are HEB, Randall's, Buccee's, and Cracker Barrel. Of course, all are "Gay Friendly", too. Randall's even has a store in Houston's Midtown, and Kroger has 2 locations that serve Montrose.

I think she knew that AirBnB has a non-discrimination policy, but hoped that "Straight Friendly" would discourage gays from applying. But, I guess she found out that gays aren't anywhere near as abhorred about the possibility of straights being around as straights apparently are of gays being around. Don't worry carlosrponce, just like they ran studies on black people to show it doesn't rub off on others, they've run the same kind of studies on gays. It won't rub off on you. If you're straight, you could be locked up with 10,000 gay people, and you'd still come out straight.

Carlos Ponce

It doesn't matter. In today's paper, "The owners state they evicted a gay couple because the men misrepresented themselves when booking a room, not because of their sexual orientation."

Kevin Lang

I guess your BS meter doesn't work when it's "Christians" talking.

Ana Draa

Amen IslandResident! We have it all in Galveston. straight, gay, liberal conservative. One of the things I love about this island is the live and let live attitude. Heather chose a very poor location for her vacation rental business. I am glad to say that by far, she is the exception, not the rule. If the gentlemen involved in this incident read this article, please know that as a vacation rental owner on the island, I would love to offer you a complimentary weekend, so you can see the true spirit of Galveston! You can contact me through Laura Elder.

Steve Fouga

A few things about this article surprised me:

First, what a strange choice of business for someone with prejudices. I wonder how this particular STR owner feels about other minorities.

Second, is $140/night typical? It sounds really low to me, and makes me wish I had availed myself of STRs for the many years I visited the Island, rather than staying in hotels.

Finally, really, everything in G-Town was booked? It hasn't felt that crowded to me so far this year. I would have thought that this time of year almost nothing was full...

Mike Box

If this lady is going to run her business this way she should advertise it as a "family oriented Christian business" and maybe she could save everyone some embarassment. Maybe there's something to these equal rights laws for gays after all.

Curtiss Brown

So sad this had to appear on regional television. Sorry this woman is a Galveston resident. As a business woman she should have more things to do than to throw out customers.

Kevin Lang

If you don't want people having sex in your bed, don't rent your bed to ANYONE. There is absolutely nothing that a gay couple is going to leave in your bed that a heterosexual couple can't.

If you don't want to do business with "those" people, well, no one is FORCING you to go into business. If you can't handle the role of proprietor, then be an employee. Or a beach bum. If you think your role in life is to minister the Word of God, then be a Minister, Pastor, Priest, or Missionary.

Don Ciaccio

It should be no surprise that the owner was running an illegal B&B. She registered it the day this story broke. Does anyone know if she's on the hook for back HOT taxes? She's been cheating the system, thus, not playing on a level ground with her competition. She should be forced to pay back taxes & penalty.

Kevin Lang

Where does one get the bright idea that "straight friendly" means "No Gays Allowed"? I guess if a hotel bills itself as "Pet Friendly" that means "No Humans Allowed"?

When I read "Pet Friendly" or "Smoker Friendly", that tells me that if I have an allergy to pet hair or dander, or tobacco smoke or odors, that might not be the place for me. I guess that if I saw Heather's ad, I'd figure that if I have a problem with straight's having been there, or possibly being in an adjoining room, that might not be the place for me.

If you're going to have anti-social rules, put your rear-end on the line and state them clearly, concisely, and precisely. Don't try to hide behind euphemisms when you clearly have no clue about how they might be interpreted.

My guess is that IF these are the policies she'd like to have, she's going to have a tough time complying with Galveston's ordinances.

Lars Faltskog

The proprietor was probably envious that she wasn't "getting any", and took her frustration out on the gay couple.

J. Shaffer

"She also commented while we were going upstairs that was their bedroom upstairs so they were even more uncomfortable with it," said Wang.

Aren't they all 'their bedrooms'?

While you can evict someone because their conduct in public is unbecoming, I don't see that this couple was doing anything untoward. I'm wondering if they quiz 'straight' couples to make sure there is no 'sin' that will be occurring behind closed doors, where no one can see.

Because even Laverne and Shirley were room mates. Right?

Kevin Lang

I cannot figure out what that comment means. Does that mean that SHE and her SO use that bed when it's not rented out? And they don't mind it if a straight couple leaves sexual fluids all over the place, but not if a gay couple did it? I guess that if she thought about how much sense her comments make, this whole episode wouldn't have happened at all.

If you can't stand the thought that someone else might have sex in your bed, then don't rent your room out. And would she know what they might do in the bed? Maybe she doesn't like guys sleeping on her side of the bed, and if it had been a "traditional" couple, she would have demanded that the wife/girlfriend sleep only on her side of the bed.

Overall, I'm not sure who makes the least sense -- her or the people defending her.

Carlos Ponce

Look at the bright side people. "He said it was late Friday night and every hotel he called was booked." EVERY hotel was booked and this was not during Mardi Gras or Dickens. That says a lot for Galveston. Why even Motel 6 (7404 Avenue J) had to turn their light off!

Ron Shelby

Actually, stating "straight friendly" may have inadvertently implied that she was Gay, but willing to host straight couples too. That's how I would have read that.

Ron Shelby

That's how the term "Gay Friendly" is used by straight owners.

George Croix

Read this morning's GDN, then remove knee from nose.
If the latest report is true, then the guy (one fo them) lied about who he'd be staying with. Looks like possibly another intentional set up of a business owner for headline value - just not a pizza parlor this time.......

Kevin Lang

Did he SAY he would be travelling with a female companion, or did she just ASSUME that he's be coming with the lady in the photo?

If I say "gay friendly", what do YOU think? How about "pet friendly"? "Smoker friendly"? Now, why would someone gay feel like he needed to portray himself as straight in order to rent a room in a "straight friendly" B&B?

Perhaps the photo can make it easy for someone to assume something they shouldn't assume, but if you're really uptight about renting to gay people, I'd request names, genders, and photos up front about everyone that's going to be staying. You know, instead of assuming that you're getting what you want, maybe go through the effort to confirm it? Doesn't "buyer beware" work both ways?

His profile photo should have just included himself, if that lady isn't going to be his regular travel companion. However, that doesn't excuse her for not doing due diligence--due diligence she might have been more knowledgeable about had she been following local ordinances and belonged to a lodging association.

Ron Shelby

Also. She asked about his wife. That photo has no labels.

Lars Faltskog

Response to carlosrponce posted at 6:32 pm on Thu, Apr 30, 2015:

Yeah, these bed and breakfast and hotel/motel folks have probably "seen it all". From transvestites to bible-thumping, intolerant fundamental preachers and their guests.

Carlos Ponce

I still can't get over your comment "seagulls are mammals". Thanks for the good laugh.[beam]
Your science teachers did NOT teach you that. I'd hate to think what they'd say if they read that comment.

Lars Faltskog

Response to carlosrponce posted at 6:13 pm on Fri, May 1, 2015:

Perhaps my science teacher didn't clearly instruct me on the difference between a mammal and a member of the fowl family, but my health teacher and psychology/sociology teachers did effectively teach me to accept people who are different than me.

The overall "take away" I got from education was invaluable. I still don't believe you were a teacher. You have some very narrow and "shaming" views toward people. Either that, or for the last couple of years you have entertained us on these GDN forums with a lot of good comedy in regard to confirming that christians are indeed non-inclusive and judgmental.

Linda Vaccaro

When a potential renter says "2 people will be staying in the room." Does the Proprietor ask "Who are the 2 people?" Could mean Father & Son, or Mother & Daughter, 2 Sisters, 2 Brothers or just 2 friends getting away for the weekend. This is ludicrous! These B & B owners should be ashamed of themselves! I will never recommend this place to anyone.

Carlos Ponce

Mr. Wang specified that he and his "spouse" would be there and supplied a picture of himself with a lady misrepresenting who would be at the B & B. When Mrs. Martinez sent the message "You are all set. We are looking forward to hosting you and your wife." Mr. Wang should have had the courtesy to respond that she had an erroneous impression from the picture he sent. I still contend that the picture exchange is for safety purposes or should be when inviting strangers to you home.

Kevin Lang

A picture on his profile included him and a woman. Do you assume that anytime you see a picture of a 2 people that it's always marital partners? Now, whether AirBnB should have required an individual picture for an individual profile is certainly a subject for discussion, but that's not what the profile picture is used for. It's used merely so the proprietor will know what the renter looks like. I guess you maintain that if he'd come solo he was still misrepresenting himself.

She misrepresented the nature of the accommodation. She said "Straight Friendly". That does NOT mean "straight only". No more than "Pet Friendly" means "Pets only". You're so happy to see a gay person get booted out of lodging that you are willing to overlook the lies the proprietor expressed. I guess some lies are better than others, eh?

Ron Shelby

Wel said.

Lars Faltskog

Yeah, carlos. You're not being very 'christian'. You're applauding that proprietor's shaming of an individual because instead of bringing forth the correct biblical example of the "one man, one woman" rule, he deceived both god almighty and the proprietor.

He will not go to heaven, he is a bad person. He needs to pray away the gay and bring a lady the next time. I got it now.

Carlos Ponce

Book Burner, for you to define who is and who is not a good Christian is laughable. Speaking of laughable, I sent your post to several friends throughout the United States and they got a good laugh from your "Seagulls and people are mammals" post. By the way if you ever do have the nerve to share your views on religion with your former priest don't be surprised if he recommends an exorcism.[beam]

Michael Millo

kev- you are spot on and these loons simply do not wish to accept any other truth than the fabricated one in their minds..they really are not worth any more of our time.

For carlos to quote the catholic religion that gay people remain celibate? you simply cannot argue with insane! I have a catholic education and NEVER was that fact, a catholic priest at St. Patricks once stated that they accept all gay people and everyone is welcome at their church and table...which in my opinion implies communion!

Carlos Ponce

ProGalveston: Talk to the priest and maybe you will believe what I posted is true. In the meantime, here is what Catholic Catechism has to say on the topic.
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

Bottom line, Homosexuals like everyone are welcome into church, for we are ALL sinners. But all sinners should confess before receiving Communion. If you are Catholic I suggest you pick up a copy of The Catholic Catechism and a copy of the Bible. The Catechism I quote was written by a team assembled by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II. I guess you are referring to them as "insane". Cardinal Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI. Would I deny Communion to a Homosexual? I do not know the condition of their confession, nor their soul. If they line up before me I will offer "The Body of Christ" and if they receive it is then between them and God. We do not pass judgment in front of the Altar. If on the other hand a person feels unworthy of receiving for various reasons he or she may line up, cross their arms in front of them and i will Bless them "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit".

J. Shaffer

“If someone is gay, who searches for the Lord and has goodwill, who am I to judge?”
Pope Francis

Carlos Ponce

That statement was in reference to homosexual priests who already take a vow of celibacy. He further added, "The problem is not having this [homosexual] orientation. We must be brothers. The problem is lobbying by this orientation, or lobbies of greedy people, political lobbies, Masonic lobbies, so many lobbies. This is the worse problem."
"Pope Francis has said gay priests should not be judged or marginalised and should be integrated into society, but he reaffirmed Church teaching that homosexual acts are a sin."
Gay rights group Stonewall told ITV News it is baffled by the Pope's comments on gay priests.
"While many lesbian, gay and bisexual Catholics will no doubt welcome this change in tone, the Pope’s criticism of those who lobby for gay equality sounds baffling when his Church still lobbies ferociously worldwide against gay people’s basic human rights."
– Richard Lane, Stonewall External Affairs Officer
Please, don't take statements out of context. You have a tendency to do that.

Michael Millo


George Croix


earl maura


Lars Faltskog

Response to carlosrponce posted at 6:33 am on Sat, May 2, 2015:

I think we have a really good consensus here that it is wrong for you to condemn folks who happen to be gay. You continue to say they are substandard and that they "won't go to heaven".

Who's to say? I think condemning gays is worse than not knowing the difference between a fowl and a mammal.

Carlos Ponce

" You continue to say they are substandard and that they "won't go to heaven". "

Lars Faltskog

Where?? All the time.

You do believe that the "sin" of the gays are worse than the sins of a two-timer or a divorcee? Correct?

Do you think a divorcee will go to heaven as long as he/she is "straight"? But, a gay won't?

Carlos Ponce

Seagull sverige, can you find ANY post where I have written what you allege? What I have written is that we ALL fall short of the kingdom. That we ALL are sinners, myself included. What part of "ALL" don't you get? And as my parish priest says "Don't judge others just because their sin is different from yours." It is through the Grace of God that ANY of us has a chance at Heaven. Jesus died on the cross for OUR sins. By affirming that and professing that Jesus is our Lord and Savior we make it to Heaven. In 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Paul describes the sins keeping some people from Heaven. But then he writes, "That is what some of you used to be; but now you have had yourselves washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God."
"You continue to say they are substandard and that they "won't go to heaven"." I never wrote that nor said that.
"You do believe that the "sin" of the gays are worse than the sins of a two-timer or a divorcee? Correct?" No, all sins are the same and can keep us from Heaven. However, all sins are forgivable except for blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I have been posting that time and time again. Look at my previous posts and you see this is true.
"Do you think a divorcee will go to heaven as long as he/she is "straight"? But, a gay won't?" Anyone who turns his or her heart and soul over to Christ and professes that Jesus died on the Cross for His or Her sins and follows Jesus' teachings and those of his disciples will make it to Heaven. I get the feeling you are confusing me with someone else. My postings are still there for you to peruse. They serve as witness that I did not post what you say I posted.

Kevin Lang

Then, why is it that you advocate businesses being legally enabled to treat gays as a special kind of sinner? If I'm not supposed to judge your sins, then why should some business owner be able to use their moral compass to discriminate against someone else?

Carlos Ponce

Everyone has their tenets. Mine for instance is when someone attacks Christianity without basis I will respond in the appropriate forum. When you enter someone's business you must play by their rules. If you don't like their rules then walk to another business. Remember the "Soup Nazi" on Seinfeld? No one dared question his rules. It was "No soup for you today!" If the bakery has a policy that requests information on the groom and there is NO groom, "No wedding Cake for you!" If the B & B texts "I'm looking forward to hosting you and your wife" and there is no wife even though you indicated such with a picture then "No B & B for you tonight!" Why does everybody seem to think "the rules don't apply to me"?

Kevin Lang

If you really believe that the B&B turned them away because he showed up with someone different than the woman in his profile picture, then I have some fine mountaintop property in Santa Fe I'd like to sell you. It even comes with a ski lift and lodge facilities.

I think for the bakery, you meant information on the BRIDE. Their issue apparently was too many grooms and not enough brides. I don't have an issue with the bakery not wanting to put 2 grooms on the cake if that's not a decoration they typically stock. However, I do have an issue when the business says that you're too sinful for them to work with you. I know that MY Christian faith does not allow me to judge your sins.

If you want to decline my business because I'm rude, or because I asked you to perform a service that your business does not typically do, that's one thing. But, if you tell me that you won't do business with me because you're a "better" sinner than I am, I think you're committing a huge social blunder, and it just might be grounds for a civil suit, and I don't think the state should be digging you out of a dung pile of your own making. If you're willing to act discourteously, the state shouldn't be providing a force field to protect you from getting at least some of it dealt back.

George Croix

The dishonest character who started all this is no doubt getting a huge laugh out of it all.....or hiring an attorney....
After all, that's the REAL reason for all the hoopla, isn't it.....?????

Kevin Lang

Which dishonest character are you referring to? The one that put the B&B on AirBnB advertising it as "Straight Friendly" when it wasn't "Friendly" at all, and also was taking in rents despite not being licensed and permitted to do so? Oh, pardon me, I think I got "honest"/"dishonest" filters messed up.

Lars Faltskog

Response to gecroix posted at 4:37 pm on Mon, May 4, 2015:

Well, geocruix -

The proprietor will be the one who has the most to "lose" in this whole thing. I'm wondering if she now thinks it was worth it all to create HER hoopla over the whole thing.

She could have accepted the man and his clandestine partner, simply taken his $. Then, after they left she could fumigate, disinfect and replace all the linen to her heart's content. But nooooooooooooo.

Lars Faltskog

Response to carlosrponce posted at 1:37 pm on Mon, May 4, 2015:

If you say that I misinterpreted your stance about your thinking gays are "substandard", then why do you advocate businesses shutting them out for services?

In your view, the businesses have the right to shut them out because ________.
Please fill in the blank. I can only assume that "they are too sinful, too substandard" goes in the blank because there's no other excuse to shut them out. It can't be b/c they don't have the $ to pay. It can't be because they aren't human beings, because they are. They aren't being refused business because they are a criminal danger to the premises....unless they do something crazy like disrobe on the premises....but anyone (gay, straight, christian, non-Christian, young, old) could conceivably be a potential security danger.

The only other conclusion is that you and others who don't want to serve gays don't want to serve them because they are not 100% "serviceable". That's wrong.

Would you be OK with a pizza place or cake place refusing Mr. Newt Gingrich a wedding reception party since he's been married many times over? He's been known to date another woman while still married to a sick woman. That's sinful....he should be refused service. See how dumb that sounds??

Lars Faltskog

Response to carlosrponce posted at 4:20 pm on Mon, May 4, 2015:

Ponce! All I know is that you don't drone on about how sinful it is in the eyes of god in regard for folks like Newt Gingrinch who have been married many times over and have admitted to being a two-timer.

I think many folks would consider two-timing and dating another while current spouse is terminally ill is a very immoral state. I don't think our Lord condones straight folks who misbehave like that. But, then again, you don't advocate folks like Gingrinch to be "abstinate" and seek the Lord for forgiveness of their adulterous sins. Again, I think folks like Anisse Parker (where she even has a beautiful family who adores her) will make it to Heaven's gate more quicker than stall-tapping or two-timing "christians".

Carlos Ponce

sverige, how many times have I posted we are ALL sinners, myself included. If the topic were Newt Gingrich we could discuss his foibles but that would be [offtopic]. And those who are "stall-tapping or two-timing" may call themselves Christians but as the Bible says."And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'"Matthew 7:23
But withhold judgement and pray that ALL see that Jesus died on the cross for our sins then Newt, Anisse, you and I and the rest of the sinners will make it to Heaven for none of us can make it on our own merit. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" John 3:16

Lars Faltskog

Well, ponce..

I actually don't believe we are "sinners". I take the Universalist approach that says that humanity is basically good. Then, folks get debased by becoming bad, evil, and corrupted over time: Examples being - becoming republicans, fracking, and swatting poor little ol' defenseless kitties. LMAO

Carlos Ponce

Well you may not believe we are sinners but Jesus does.Remember the woman brought before him to be stoned. Jesus said “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” John 8:7
Now among the accusers were men of Jewish faith, scribes and the Pharisees. Scribes had knowledge of the law and could draft legal documents (contracts for marriage, divorce, loans, inheritance, mortgages, the sale of land, and the like). Pharisees were members of a party that believed in resurrection and in following legal traditions that were ascribed not to the Bible but to “the traditions of the fathers.” Like the scribes, they were also well-known legal experts. Jesus knew that NOT ONE among them were without sin or he would not have made such a challenge. And remember that person if he or she did exist could cast the FIRST stone. Every one else could continue stoning once the first one was thrown. So who am I to believe, Jesus or sverige? I choose to believe JESUS. "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. " Romans 3:23
I think you are misinterpreting what Universalists believe.
From "What Do Universalists Believe?"
"Concerning punishment for disobedience. We believe the way of the transgressor is hard, -- that the wicked are like the troubled sea when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt, for there is no peace, says our God, to the wicked, -- that he that doeth wrong, shall receive for the wrong which he hath done, and there is no respect of persons, -- that God will render to every man according to his deeds, -- tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile."

Lars Faltskog

Well, Ponce:

I ascribe to this -

"Mankind is basically good. Unitarian Universalists reject the biblical doctrine of original sin. They teach that basically all people are good and have no need for spiritual redemption from the effects of sin."

The above quote is from Here is the link:

Jesus was not unique...merely a spiritual leader among others.

Carlos Ponce

Consider the sources. Mine is produced by Auburn University "".
Yours "" comes from "Southern Baptist Convention, North American Mission Board".
Did you READ their Biblical response on the same page?
"Biblical Response:
The Bible teaches that mankind—descended from Adam and Eve—is, by nature, sinful. Thus, people are incapable of enjoying a relationship with a holy God and are in need of full redemption. No acts of righteousness or good works can restore a sinful person to a right relation with God. Neither can a person overcome the effects that sin has both in this life and for eternity (see Rom. 3:23, 7:14-25; 1 John 1:8-10)."
While I have NO problem with Southern Baptist do YOU really trust them to report on another religion?

Jim Forsythe

So are you saying no religion should report on any other? Or it just Southern Baptist?

Carlos Ponce

Notice what I wrote to sverige: "While I have NO problem with Southern Baptist[s] do YOU really trust them to report on another religion?'
The emphasis was on the word "YOU" meaning "sverige". He had previously posted derisive comments on Ted Cruse and his father Rafael Cruse for being Southern Baptists. Note also I posted "I have NO problem with Southern Baptists". I never said religions should not report on any other, only questioned sverige's referencing a religion he had called out several forums ago.

Kevin Lang

I think that academia wins over religious bias. Except when it doesn't. I've seen lots of denigration about academic think tanks from conservative posters, but I guess that when they give the answer you want, then they're great authorities. I wonder if is the esteemed source in all subjects, or just this one slice of this one subject. I wonder what has to say about "Defense of Marriage Acts", "Common Core", "Global Warming", and "Alternative Fuels"..... Whatever it is, I'm sure it's definitive, unless it isn't.

Lars Faltskog

Well, ponce:

Any individual or organization who in good faith reports something accurate and non-judgmental regarding another organization is worth consideration of their validity.

Although I (and many others) take issue with the judgmental tendencies of the 'christian' organization of the baptists, an article source from them that holds accuracy is a relatively innocuous frame of reference. I would be OK with having a baptist ring up my grocery items or supply me with a definition (if both done in good faith). As far as more in-depth spiritual guidance or a person to admire - yes - I would have a "problem" with them. I think you know how I stand on that...but I hope this clears things up.

Carlos Ponce

"As far as more in-depth spiritual guidance or a person to admire - yes - I would have a "problem" with them." That answers my query. You posted a link to a source providing "in-depth spiritual guidance" with which you have a problem. Amazing that you admit it.

Lars Faltskog

Response to carlosrponce posted at 4:43 pm on Tue, May 26, 2015: are without a doubt "reaching". There is nothing wrong with reading from a variety of sources (with the open mind I have) and conveniently citing a good explanation of a definition. Period.

What you "read into" in regard is your issue.

Carlos Ponce

Conveniently? How funny.

Lars Faltskog

Keeping a wide breadth of source-finding and striving for inclusiveness isn't "funny", I don't think. But, if you find humor in it and it helps your psyche...then have at it! :)

Carlos Ponce

Perhaps "Ironic" would be a better term here. [beam]

Janet Cohen

I'd like to know the name of the establishment not to support.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.