Michael Coren is typical of the "progressive" Christian, based on what the linked article implies. He apparently has written a number of books, with the latest being entitled "Epiphany: A Christians' Change of Heart Over Same-Sex Marriage". The article in question speaks of a "proposal by Trinity Western University of Langley, B.C., to establish a law school." The issue revolves around a conflict between Canadian law which supports the travesty of SSM and the right of a religious school to impose standards upon its students...the disregard for which can lead to expulsion. This is the typical conflict imposed by all states or nations that choose to support a behavior long considered immoral and abnormal. In the good old U.S. of A., our Constitution acknowledges our right to express our faith as we see fit in all we do. Such legal impositions such as state recognition of sexual immorality naturally causes hardship for people of faith and reason and naturally pits "rights" against each other.
Such is the case with Trinity, as they seek to maintain standards of conduct among their students, faculty and employees. It is their right to do so and as these standards are up front, open and easily found out by all who seek to spot among their community, the whine that they are "denying" or "discriminating"...as if homosexuality is akin to race or sex...is ludicrous.
But worse, the hatred for those who uphold long held and time-tested standards of morality and virtue extends to the hiring of those who acquire their law degree through this university. The problem is that British Columbia will, like Ontario, deny law licenses to graduates of Trinity's law program, simply because the school has moral expectations for their students! It's not like graduates are obliged to ignore the law simply because they signed onto a covenant. But just like in the case of Amy Coney Barrett, somehow leftists, and this Coren dude, can't believe that a Christian can uphold the law if it conflicts with their religious beliefs. In the case of BC and Ontario, apparently, they aren't even going to take the chance, as idiotic as the notion might be.
So what of Coren? Early in the piece he makes the cheesy and woefully deceitful argument (though typical of the "progressive" Christian) that after His resurrection, Christ "went on again to not address sex, abortion, contraception, pornography or any of the other topics that seem to so obsess the Christian right. Odd, that." Not odd at all, given three very significant factors:
1. Christ was known to uphold the commandments of the Father, encouraging obedience to them, including those regarding human sexuality, which prohibits various immoral expressions of it. What this doofus refers to as "obsession" (another typical argument and equally false) is actually concern with the obsession of the immoral that has led to laws that codify immorality. As sexual immorality is harmful to body, mind and soul, decent Christians are justified in opposing it where proponents seek to legitimize it.
2. Jewish law in the time of Christ resulted in sexual immorality not being as common as it otherwise might have been, and the punishment for being guilty of engaging in homosexual behavior was death, so it wasn't prevalent in Jewish society...at least not that anyone has ever proven. Why would Jesus spend time speaking on that which was not a problem for the targets of His preaching at the time?
3. It is said by John (I believe) that there is much that Christ said and did that he did not record in his gospel. To suggest that Christ NEVER broached the subject of homosexuality is an assertion without basis.
Again, Coren assume Christians can't do the job because of their faith. He says Trinity is inconsistent in their policy:
"The question is whether those future graduates should then be permitted to work as lawyers within the public square, to participate in a legal and social framework where the equality of LGBTQ people is the law — a fundamental human right. Trinity’s advocates respond by claiming the covenant is about protecting the sanctity of marriage, not homophobia. That’s a rather disingenuous claim, to say the least. What if a heterosexual student had a sexual relationship while enrolled at the college?"
An actual journalist, or an actual Christian concerned with truth and facts would have the answer to that question before writing an article about the case. In Illinois, Wheaton college has a similar covenant incoming students are contractually expected to abide. It is my understanding that ANY sexual immorality results in the same consequences. I would assume Trinity is the same, but I'm not opposed to what has been stated about their covenant...Coren is. If he wishes to portray them as wacky, interview someone from the school who is solidly familiar with the covenant in question. Doing so may even have resulted in making his article unnecessary. Having all the facts can do that.
But it seems that Coren believes that one cannot live one way and abide and defend the law at the same time. One might be led to believe that there is absolutely no law that any Canadian lawyer finds objectionable. It's absurd and unjustly derogatory toward Christians who do not pervert the Word of God to suit their personal preferences and opinions...like Dan and feo.
Then Coren goes all in.
"Prejudice is what it is, by the way, and I’m sick and tired of people trying to use and abuse Christianity to justify their own baser feelings. Homosexuality is hardly mentioned in the Bible. Jesus doesn’t refer to it at all. The Old Testament never mentions lesbianism, the story of Sodom is more about rejecting the stranger than gay sex … and let’s just say that David and Jonathan might have had a tough time becoming law students at Trinity Western.
Frankly, scripture is vague on the issue. But sex and sexuality simply do not figure large in the Bible story, particularly when Christ becomes its centre."
Like all false Christians, Coren believes that discriminating against bad behaviors is anti-Christian, as if Christ never spoke about human behaviors. This is what Coren regards as "baser feelings".
---He also suggests that how much something is mentioned matters to whether or not it is moral or immoral. A single, solitary "Thou shalt not" is sufficient to all true Christians who seek to live a life pleasing to God. It doesn't require reiteration every other page throughout the entirety of Scripture. As I've demonstrated to Dan over the years on more than one occasion (because for him, reiteration is required, though never sufficient for edification), even pro-homosexual scholars and theologians acknowledge the clear and unmistakable prohibition of homosexual behavior in any context or scenario in which it might take place. It is always an abomination, detestable, sinful and forbidden.
---The OT doesn't need to mention lesbianism. As "progressive" Christians are quick to remind us, the ancient Hebrews were a patriarchal culture. They counted their population by the number of adult men, not by how many men, women AND children there were. What applied to men was (at least) equally applicable to women. If a man was prohibited from lying with a male as one would with a female, there's no way a woman could lie with a female as one would with a male.
---The story of Sodom is NOT about rejecting the stranger as the men of Sodom were absolutely NOT looking to reject the two strangers Lot was protecting. The homosexual aspect of the tale describes just how wicked the people of Sodom were, that they would welcome strangers by having homosexual sex with them. If anyone was being rejected, it was the men of Sodom in their intentions to welcome the visitors in their customary manner. I'm being only partially snarky here. They didn't get pissed and attempt to force their will until after they were refused by Lot.
---Nothing is more desperate than the homosexual attempt to portray the David/Jonathan friendship as homosexual. The activist/enabler is so corrupt as to accuse them of vile and detestable desires just to pretend there is Biblical precedent for their own.
Scripture is not "vague" at all on the subject of sexual immorality in general and certainly not with regard to homosexuality behavior. God forbids it because it is detestable, and even mandates capital punishment until the sacrifice of Christ on the cross paid for that sin as well.
Coren is not a Christian any more than are feo or Dan. They all worship a god of their own making who has only a loose similarity to the God of the Bible. It is not conservative Christians who drive people away. It is the sin nature of those who find the moral teachings of Christianity inconvenient that does it.