Wednesday, March 26, 2014

After Pressure, World Vision Reverses Policy on Hiring Gays

After Pressure, World Vision Reverses Policy on Hiring Gays

By Julio Severo
After a backlash from Evangelicals, World Vision, an international nonprofit ministry, has reversed its decision to allow those in same-sex marriages to be employed.
Organization board leaders said in a letter to supporters Wednesday that they had made a “mistake” by changing its policy.
“We are brokenhearted over the pain and confusion we have caused many of our friends, who saw this decision as a reversal of our strong commitment to Biblical authority,” the board said in the letter.
The quick reversal was result of a firestorm of heavy criticism from Christian leaders.
These leaders denounced the charity’s decision to hire applicants in same-sex marriages. World Vision’s president, Richard Stearns, had said the move was not “symbolic not of compromise but of [Christian] unity.”
But Evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham, president and CEO of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, dismissed Stearn’s reasoning.
“World Vision maintains their decision is based on unifying the church — which I find offensive — as if supporting sin and sinful behavior can unite the Church,” Franklin wrote on the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association website.
In addition, the head of Assemblies of God in the U.S., George Wood, had called for its members to shift their support to other charities. He said, “Far from promoting Christian unity, the policy change enlists World Vision on the liberal Protestant side of the same-sex marriage debate as opposed to that of Pentecostal and Evangelical churches in the U.S., not to mention Pentecostal and Evangelical churches worldwide.”
Stearns said the board of World Vision had been praying about the decision for years, and the result was to allow “married” gay Christians. But in the letter to supporters Wednesday leaders admitted they had not sought enough counsel from their Christian partners.
“As a result, we made a change to our conduct policy that was not consistent with our Statement of Faith and our commitment to the sanctity of marriage,” they said.
“While World Vision U.S. stands firmly on the biblical view of marriage, we strongly affirm that all people, regardless of their sexual orientation, are created by God and are to be loved and treated with dignity and respect,” they said.
A fifth of the World Vision funding comes from the U.S. government. But most of its funding comes from Evangelicals and while they are a majority of donors, World Vision will have a hard time accepting items from the gay agenda.
Yet, what will happen if the U.S. government, which has been an avid advocate of the homosexual imperialism, increases substantially its funding?
Then, as now, we should increase our pressure. It is exactly this pressure that made World Vision reverse its foolish decision allowing “married” gay Christians.
A little pressure could also help World Vision in Brazil, whose director, Ariovaldo Ramos, said,
“Everybody who, in everyplace, fights against poverty, for the human liberation, for justice and rights available to everybody had, in Hugo Chávez, a reference of commitment to the poor and the oppressed.”
He also said,
“The best we could say of someone is that, because he lived here, the world became better! We can say this of Hugo Chávez!”
Now the director of World Vision Brazil would be wise to imitate its U.S. sister organization and reverse his stupid praise for a Marxist strongman and his stupid support of Marxist causes.
With information from CBN.News, ChristianPost and Ariovaldo Ramos’ public statements.
Recommended Reading:

1 comment :

Christine said...

If this man thinks Hugo Chavez was in favor of the poor, he can come now and see their plight. Being ‘for the poor’ is a great political pose, but the statements that people in his government make publicly tell the real truth. “The poor are our strength; of course we do not want to eradicate poverty”. And recently the Minister of Education “We want to help the extremely poor, but we do not want to make them middle class or they will want to be ‘escualidos’ (opposition)”