Connect with us

Wire

Male Pastor Fired After Coming Out as Transgender, Now Suing Church After Congregation Voted to Fire Him

Western Journal

Published

on

A Canadian male pastor who identifies as a woman has filed a lawsuit against his former church for voting to fire him after he came out as transgender, claiming discrimination.

When the Rev. Junia Joplin was hired by the Lorne Park Baptist Church in Mississauga, Ontario, in 2014, he was living his life as the male that God formed him to be in his mother’s womb. However, he revealed during a livestream sermon last year that he planned to live his life as a woman, Junia.

According to CBC News, the lawsuit alleges that while Joplin received some support from members of the congregation, the church unilaterally ended his leadership.

Joplin’s suit contends he was subject to an “unfair process” in which he was questioned during several virtual town halls and that the congregation voted to end his employment in July of 2020.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?

  • Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

On Wednesday, Lorne Park Baptist Church stated that it had gone through a “process of attempting to discern God’s will” when faced with Joplin’s revelation about his gender identity, a procedure it conducted in a “careful and thoughtful manner.”

“In the end, the congregation voted to terminate her employment as lead pastor of the church, with the majority of the votes to terminate made for theological reasons,” the church’s executive council chair, David Huctwith, said in a statement, according to CBC. “We offered her what we think was a fair severance.”

The suit seeks nearly $200,000 in damages and contends that Joplin’s firing was a breach of Canada’s Human Rights Code, which bans employment discrimination on the basis of sexual or gender identity.

Last week, Joplin explained in an interview that the whole experience left him with a sense of “anxiety” about church life that he’d never felt before.

“Those were very much my first steps into social transition,” he told CBC. “That’s a hard place to be. I think just about any trans person will tell you that can feel frightening, feel vulnerable. It’s a time when support is so essential and, unfortunately, for a lot of us we don’t get it in places like our workplace.”

“But for that to happen within that context of a caring community — I think one of the toughest things for me was knowing that I’m going through one of the most consequential and difficult seasons that I’ll ever go through in my life, and I’m pretty much isolated from my faith community, from the place that I would most naturally go to for support.”

He said he hopes his lawsuit will make Canada more inclusive and safe for trans people.

“I don’t want other queer people to connect to faith communities that don’t really welcome them unequivocally, without caveat or qualification,” he explained.

No nation that professes to protect religious freedom — although Canada’s claim to these protections certainly has been called into question in recent years — could possibly defend prohibiting a church from firing a pastor they do not believe is prepared to carry out its mission to preach the Gospel and minister to the church.

Period.

Joplin has clearly stated that he hopes his lawsuit will ensure that other churches are not allowed to make the same decision that his church did when he expected them to support his transition to a lifestyle that plainly contradicts the biblical teachings on how a pastor should live and what example he should be to his flock.

We cannot say how the church would have treated him if he had confessed that he was struggling with gender identity issues and wanted to approach this biblically; one certainly hopes he would have found the love and support he needed.

But what is a church to do when its pastor insists his counter-biblical desires ought to be accepted and treated as though they are healthy and consistent with the Christian call to take up our cross and follow Christ?

It is nothing short of chilling how common it has become in the West to assert that religious organizations or individuals ought to accept homosexuality or transgenderism, even more so when some try to dress it up as actually Christian to do so.

The suit alleges that Joplin “pursued a progressive and LGBTQ+ inclusive ministry” during his time in church leadership, which is a trend consistent with many contemporary churches that are “deconstructing” biblical authority to embrace such worldly views of sexuality and gender identity.

It is all the more chilling that governing bodies have more frequently enacted policy or judicial rulings indicating that the faithful no longer have the right to determine how they practice their faith.

No Christian church should be prevented from booting a leader it simply feels is unfit for the role.

Mr. Joplin needs Christ’s love as much as every one of us — but in embracing his so-called gender identity, he was simply not in a position to lead a Christian church.

No church can be safe from false doctrine if its members do not hold their leaders accountable to the holy word of God, the objective standard with which we can determine what solid biblical pastors look like and how they ought to lead.

This is how churches can ward off wolves in sheep’s clothing who seek to prey on church members and false teachers who will lead the flock astray into bad theology.

In nations such as Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, it is no simply longer time to worry about whether the world understands our nuanced views on homosexuality and transgenderism.

They will never understand that we can love all people without agreeing that their lifestyle is moral — and certainly without agreeing to let someone who lives an immoral lifestyle lead a Christian church.

You will answer to God and God alone for how you treat His image-bearers, and if you genuinely love and are concerned about those who live a life contrary to his word, He sees that. Know this and take comfort in it. His opinion is the only one that matters.

We might not be able to convince the world that the Bible’s views on homosexuality and gender are infallible truth — but if you genuinely believe they are, you should shamelessly and boldly profess to the world that you take your moral cues from the Bible’s objective moral code.

If you are a Christian, this is your religion, the one the government ought to protect your right to practice and the one that your God requires you to live every day.

You have the sacred right to believe this and to live out your faith accordingly, but you must fight to protect this right.

Every Christian needs to commit to standing up for our rights to live according to our conscience — or we might quickly no longer have the right to do so.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Wire

Covering for Kaepernick: Couric Edited Anti-Kneeling Comments Due to RBG’s Racial Justice ‘Blind Spot’

Western Journal

Published

on

Employment apparently isn’t a very appealing prospect to former “CBS Evening News” anchor Katie Couric.

After bouncing around the nether regions of the media landscape since she left CBS in 2011 — her last major gig was with Yahoo’s streaming division, which is the mainstream media’s version of the direct-to-video movie — Couric has decided to write a tell-all called “Going There.” It manages to earn the title.

In the book, Couric admits to sabotaging the careers of other female journalists and anchors because she felt threatened.

She said Martha Stewart needed “some healthy humbling (prison will do that … ) to develop a sense of humor.”

take our poll - story continues below

Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?

  • Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

She jokingly implied Diane Sawyer, former host of ABC’s “Good Morning America,” would trade sexual favors for interviews. (But don’t worry, Couric didn’t really mean it: “I’m pretty sure I speak for Diane when I say neither of us ever resorted to actual fellatio to land an interview,” she wrote, “but we both engaged in the metaphoric kind — flattering gatekeepers, family members, and whoever else stood in the way of a big get.” Who said ethics in journalism was dead?)

In short, “Going There” has taken Couric from unemployed to very unemployable, and the book hasn’t even come out yet.

As if to put a finer point on the matter, the latest leaked anecdote from the forthcoming tome regarding an interview with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg manages the impressive feat of infuriating both the right and the left simultaneously.

According to a Monday piece from the Daily Mail, Couric said she selectively edited her 2016 sit-down interview with Ginsburg to omit the liberal icon’s scathing remarks directed at athletes who knelt during the national anthem, ostensibly in the name of “protecting” her.

The interview was done for Yahoo News in October 2016. At that point, two careers were in the process of terminal decline.

One was Couric’s, as she had gone from CBS News to ABC News to the news division of the MySpace of search engines.

The other was that of then-San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who’d placed himself in the midst of a media maelstrom by choosing to kneel during “The Star-Spangled Banner” in protest of American-centric injustice; it didn’t help that the controversy this created occurred concurrently with a precipitous decline in the quality of Kaepernick’s play.

However, other athletes joined Kaepernick and anthem-kneeling became A Thing™ in the fall of 2016, albeit as a phenomenon far more controversial than it is five years later. It was against this backdrop that Couric asked RBG what she thought of the athletes kneeling for the anthem.

The interview as published made it clear that Ginsburg wasn’t a fan. “I think it’s really dumb of them,” she said.

“Would I arrest them for doing it? No,” the justice continued. “I think it’s dumb and disrespectful. I would have the same answer if you asked me about flag burning. I think it’s a terrible thing to do, but I wouldn’t lock a person up for doing it. I would point out how ridiculous it seems to me to do such an act.”

Couric went further, asking: “But when it comes to these football players, you may find their actions offensive, but what you’re saying is, it’s within their rights to exercise those actions?”

“Yes,” she said. “If they want to be stupid, there’s no law that should be preventive. If they want to be arrogant, there’s no law that prevents them from that. What I would do is strongly take issue with the point of view that they are expressing when they do that.”

However, according to the Daily Mail, Couric revealed in “Going There” that Ginsburg — the most far-left justice to have ever sat on the high court bench by almost any metric — went even further, saying athletes like Kaepernick were showing “contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life.”

“Which they probably could not have lived in the places they came from … as they became older they realize that this was youthful folly. And that’s why education is important,” Ginsburg said.

Do you agree with Ginsburg's comments on anthem protests?

Couric said that while she tried to keep her “personal politics” out of her journalism (do try to stifle your laughter as you read that), she was a “big RBG fan” and felt the remarks were “unworthy of a crusader for equality” like Ginsburg.

She decided to leave the remarks out, obviously. Couric’s reasoning? Ginsburg was “elderly and probably didn’t fully understand the question” and racial justice was a “blind spot” for her. The justice was 83 at the time and died four years later.

Much like every other anecdote we’ve heard Couric share in her upcoming memoir, this makes the former “CBS Nightly News” anchor look nowhere near as good as one imagines she thinks it does.

First, yes — in 2021, the suggestion that athletes kneeling for the national anthem to protest vague notions of injustice is disrespectful to the country, to those who have sacrificed for it and to the fans whose expenditures pay their salaries is widely considered heretical and reactionary. In 2016, however, that was not the case.

In fact, as late as 2018, 54 percent of respondents to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll said kneeling for “The Star-Spangled Banner” was “not appropriate.”

Couric’s memory, one might say, is as selective as her editing; it’s not too much of a leap to assume she wasn’t “protecting” Ginsburg so much as she was protecting her own opinion. If one of the country’s leftist heroines was willing to go as far as to say anthem protests show “contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life,” maybe it wasn’t Ginsburg who had the “blind spot.”

It’s also worth noting that nowhere in the Yahoo interview (or other contemporaneous sit-downs) did the justice come across as unduly “elderly” — and her response made clear the excuse Ginsburg “probably didn’t fully understand the question” is silly. For that matter, if RBG really were in such a state of decline that she couldn’t properly comprehend the question and Couric was “protecting” her, why was the interview published at all?

The likely answer is that Couric believes none of her own excuses. In this case, her “personal politics” couldn’t allow her to let conservatives have the pleasure of Ginsburg pointing out the obvious when it comes to anthem protesters. She published a narrative, not the news.

It’s worth noting this revelation will have the added bonus of further enraging progressives still unhappy with Ginsburg for not retiring in 2014 when the Democrats had the White House and the Senate.

Her death in September 2020 led to Amy Coney Barrett’s ascension to the high court. After the Supreme Court refused to block Texas’ abortion law, that led to tweets like this one from writer Nandini Balial:

Hey, speaking of “dumb and disrespectful.”

Whatever the case, Couric’s memoir is shaping up to be one of the great media miscalculations of recent years, a self-sabotaging tell-all that spills plenty of dirt — and almost all of it about Katie Couric.

She killed the careers of other female journalists because she felt threatened by them. She admits to engaging in “metaphoric” sex acts to get scoops. And now we know she selectively edited an interview when RBG made too much sense.

At this rate, by the time “Going There” is released on Oct. 26, Katie Couric might not even be able to get a gig on TikTok.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Employment apparently isn’t a very appealing prospect to former “CBS Evening News” anchor Katie Couric. After bouncing around the nether regions of the media landscape since she left CBS in 2011 — her last major gig was with Yahoo’s streaming division, which is the mainstream media’s version of the direct-to-video movie — Couric has decided to write a tell-all called “Going There.” It manages to earn the title. In the book, Couric admits to sabotaging the careers of other female journalists and anchors because she felt threatened. She said Martha Stewart needed “some healthy humbling (prison will do that … ) to develop a sense of humor.” She jokingly implied Diane Sawyer, former host of ABC’s “Good Morning America,” would trade sexual favors for interviews. (But don’t worry, Couric didn’t really mean it: “I’m pretty sure I speak for Diane when I say neither of us ever resorted to actual fellatio to land an interview,” she wrote, “but we both engaged in the metaphoric kind — flattering gatekeepers, family members, and whoever else stood in the way of a big get.” Who said ethics in journalism was dead?) In short, “Going There” has taken Couric from unemployed to very unemployable, and the book hasn’t even come out yet. As if to put a finer point on the matter, the latest leaked anecdote from the forthcoming tome regarding an interview with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg manages the impressive feat of infuriating both the right and the left simultaneously. According to a Monday piece from the Daily Mail, Couric said she selectively edited her 2016 sit-down interview with Ginsburg to omit the liberal icon’s scathing remarks directed at athletes who knelt during the national anthem, ostensibly in the name of “protecting” her. The interview was done for Yahoo News in…

Continue Reading

Wire

Aaron Lewis Unleashes on Dems: They’re ‘Responsible for Every F***ing Scar That Exists’ on America

Western Journal

Published

on

Musician Aaron Lewis shredded the Democratic Party as he performed a new country anthem during an acoustic set in Texas last week.

Lewis played his most recent single, “Am I the Only One,” a ballad about the state of the nation in the coronavirus era.

In doing so, he shared his thoughts on what Democrats are doing to life and liberty, going so far as to tell the crowd that they are responsible for every “scar” on our battered country.

The Staind frontman and popular solo artist, known for his poetic and reflective music, broke into a long diatribe that was not fit for radio as he ripped Democrats for dividing and destroying America.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?

  • Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“I really look back on this timeframe in history and wonder how we were allowed — how we allowed such ridiculousness to happen in this country,” he said during an Oct. 7 show in Grand Prairie, Texas. “We’ve allowed a virus that was created by man to destroy the entire fabric of mankind.”

WARNING: The following video contains graphic language that some viewers will find offensive.


Strumming his guitar, Lewis told the raucous crowd, “See, I liked American history at school. I paid close attention in that class. Yeah, but did we all pay attention? Because if we all paid attention in our f***ing history classes, we would know that the Democrats are responsible for every f***ing scar that exists on this country.

“Let’s go through history, shall we, real quick? Every American Indian massacre. Every f***ing slave aside from eight that was ever owned in this f***ing country was owned by f***ing Democrats.

“Every segregational law, every racist law, every Jim Crow law, every f***ing KKK meeting was done by the g*****n Democrats,” he said, to wild cheers from the audience.

“Can we please embrace history so we don’t f***ing repeat it? Please! Go look it up yourself. Please, I’m begging you, do not take my word for it. Get off Google and go look it the f*** up yourself.

“The Democrats are responsible for every f***ing scar that exists on this country. Period. The f***ing end. I implore all of you, please go look it up yourself. I don’t want you to believe me,” he said.

“I don’t want you to think that just because I have this microphone what I’m saying is true. I want you to go and look it the f*** up yourself. Find out for yourself. Wake up.”

After concluding a verse of the song, Lewis asked his audience to recall the riots that overtook America last year. He obliterated the leftist activists who used the unrest to go after cultural landmarks and lit up those who supported and enabled them.

“So last year during those riots that the Democrats sponsored, that the Democrats supported, that the Democrats bailed criminals out of jail for, that our vice president created a fund to bail out the people that were committing crimes during riots — those statues they were tearing down? … They’re all Democrats,” he said.

“Every statue they just tore down, all of them, they’re all Democrats. Isn’t that something? Ain’t that something? Just think about that for a second,” he said before continuing the song.

Lewis has gravitated toward country music in recent years. He has also clearly gravitated toward politics.

His music has endeared him to rock fans for its sincerity and beauty. Lewis isn’t done being sincere, even if he’s not always so eloquent.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Musician Aaron Lewis shredded the Democratic Party as he performed a new country anthem during an acoustic set in Texas last week. Lewis played his most recent single, “Am I the Only One,” a ballad about the state of the nation in the coronavirus era. In doing so, he shared his thoughts on what Democrats are doing to life and liberty, going so far as to tell the crowd that they are responsible for every “scar” on our battered country. The Staind frontman and popular solo artist, known for his poetic and reflective music, broke into a long diatribe that was not fit for radio as he ripped Democrats for dividing and destroying America. “I really look back on this timeframe in history and wonder how we were allowed — how we allowed such ridiculousness to happen in this country,” he said during an Oct. 7 show in Grand Prairie, Texas. “We’ve allowed a virus that was created by man to destroy the entire fabric of mankind.” WARNING: The following video contains graphic language that some viewers will find offensive. Strumming his guitar, Lewis told the raucous crowd, “See, I liked American history at school. I paid close attention in that class. Yeah, but did we all pay attention? Because if we all paid attention in our f***ing history classes, we would know that the Democrats are responsible for every f***ing scar that exists on this country. “Let’s go through history, shall we, real quick? Every American Indian massacre. Every f***ing slave aside from eight that was ever owned in this f***ing country was owned by f***ing Democrats. “Every segregational law, every racist law, every Jim Crow law, every f***ing KKK meeting was done by the g*****n Democrats,” he said, to wild cheers from the audience. “Can we please embrace…

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week