Student-led “Day of Truth” to be held April 28
http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4444
ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND NEWS RELEASE
April 1, 2008 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT ADF MEDIA RELATIONS: (480) 444-0020 or www.telladf.org/pressroom
Student-led “Day of Truth” to be held April 28
ADF sponsors fourth annual “Day of Truth” to allow students
to express Christian viewpoint on homosexual behavior
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. — Christian students at high schools nationwide will participate in the fourth annual “Day of Truth” on April 28. The “Day of Truth” is a student-led event designed to provide students an opportunity to counter the promotion of the homosexual agenda by peacefully expressing an opposing viewpoint from a Christian perspective.
“Christian students should be allowed to express their viewpoint just like any other student,” said Alliance Defense Fund Senior Counsel Joe Infranco. “The Day of Truth is an opportunity for Christian students to respectfully present a different viewpoint than students participating in the Day of Silence. The truth emerges when both sides of an issue are presented.”
The Day of Truth will be held on the next school day after the Day of Silence, an event promoted by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which asks students to remain silent for an entire day to express their support of the homosexual agenda.
In 2005, ADF launched the Day of Truth as a peaceful, nationwide, student-led event. Students at more than 1,600 schools participated in the event in 2007.
“Students can’t be expected to make good, well-informed decisions if they’re only hearing part of the story,” said Infranco. “Making informed decisions requires having good information. The consequences of making decisions with inadequate information can be severe.”
For more information on the Day of Truth, visit www.dayoftruth.org.
ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.
www.telladf.org www.dayoftruth.org
4 Comments
To me, this is just a way to fight against a group of people who you simply disagree with. There is no reason to fight against homosexual rights. Some say that homosexuals already have all the rights that everyone else has, but this is not true, they lack the right of marriage. Why is it impossible to accept that some people are different from you, and do not wish to be apart of your selected beliefs? Is it too hard to just accept someone for who he or she is and live harmoniously side-by-side?
They have the right to marry, but they don’t have the right to redefine marriage. Redefinition of marriage impacts all of society on personal, legal, and political levels.
Accepting or allowing someone to live harmoniously side-by-side does not mean that all of their conduct must be sanctioned or approved.
So they can marry, but hey just can’t redefine marriage?
Does that mean it was wrong for African-Americans to “redefine marriage” in 1967 with Loving v. Virginia? After all, they had the right to marry within their own race, just like everyone else.
How exactly does “redefinition” of marriage impact all of society, as you claim? What about redefining voting rights, or property rights, as has happened previously in American history? What about comparable societies in Europe who have “redefined” marriage?
There’s a reason that the law does not work with “one-size-fits-all” logic. Of course homosexual individuals have the right, just like everyone else, to marry someone of the opposite sex. But you also have the right, just like anyone else, to tolerate it. And you have the right, just like everyone else, to convert to my religion, dress in the way I tell you to dress, only speak about what I tell you, etc.
This is not “protecting marriage.” It is the legalization of prejudice against people who do not agree with your specific interpretation of the Bible and Christianity. Last time I checked, that was not what democracy is about. It is wrong to take away civil rights with a plebiscite.
If you are protecting rights, then you should be protecting the rights of those opposing the Day of Silence in their First Ammendment Rights to have their Free Speech. One group cannot claim “First Ammendment” and then say it is wrong for the other side to have their say.
GLSEN is not “protecting gays” they are taking away my belief of the Bible and having their day to say that my interpretation is wrong. If you want Freedom of Speech, you have to allow both sides, or don’t say you believe in it.
Black people cannot change their color; they were discriminated against on the basis of their skin, which they wore on them all the time 24/7. Gays are “discriminated against” or so they say, by who they choose to have sex with. There is a difference!