Pasadena California Public Health Director: Evolution is Satanic, Disney is Superstition/Witchcraft

Eric Walsh ... a highly paid California city employee ... income around $250,000 a year (including bonus) ... is the Pasadena City Health Director. His duties included restaurant inspections, public health initiatives and declaring public health emergencies. He is also a 7th Day Adventist preacher with some strong religious views that the city isn't happy with.

Should this city employee have the right to his religion and preaching ... or is the city right to suspend him because he's a city employee who is charge of public health and some of his statements are not in line with being politically correct (and some are downright rude).

LA Times - Pasadena CA Health Director Put on Leave Over Controversial Comments

Pasadena city officials placed Public Health Director Eric Walsh on temporary paid administrative leave Thursday after they learned of controversial statements he had made about homosexuality and evolution in online videos and audio clips.

In sermons uploaded to various websites, Walsh, a Seventh-day Adventist preacher, calls evolution "a religion created by Satan," compares Disney to a "dark empire" of superstition and witchcraft, and criticizes homosexuality.

Walsh, an associate pastor at Altadena Seventh-day Adventist Church, was hired as the director of Pasadena's Public Health Department in 2010, Boyer said. He also served as the city's public health officer and oversaw the creation of a dental clinic that served low-income patients, as well as those with HIV/AIDS who could not get care elsewhere, Boyer said.

His department was also responsible for restaurant inspections, public health initiatives and declaring public health emergencies. In 2012, Walsh earned about $193,600 in wages and $56,900 in benefits, according to data from the state controller's office

He has many awards and has a pretty solid resume.
Biography of Public Health Director Walsh

Can someone be in charge of public health when they aren't really happy with the people they are supposed to be helping? Sermons against Homosexuals ... Muslims ... "others" .... ??

Pasadena Star News - Public Health Director on Admin Leave After Homophobic Sermon Furor

City Manager Michael Beck announced Thursday that he has placed Public Health Director Dr. Eric Walsh on paid administrative leave following the discovery of online videos of religious sermons in which Walsh expresses discriminatory views on homosexuals, Muslims and others.

His public speeches while in office contradict his sermons.

Topics discussed by Walsh in the pulpit include: homosexuality as a sin; Oprah, JAY Z, Beyonce and as examples of the spirit of anti-Christ; Darwin’s theory of evolution as a satanic belief; and describing the prophet Muhammad, founder of Islam, as a Satanist.

Those views contrast with Walsh’s public speeches. He has spoken at All Saints Church, where the city’s first gay marriage took place, as well as the Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast in 2012. In those addresses, Walsh expressed support for Pasadena’s multicultural community and argued that discrimination can actually increase sickness in a city. He also quoted rappers Tupac and Kanye West and gave Oprah accolades for her work for impoverished students in Africa.

I don't see how his wages are relevant.

a reply to: FlyersFan

As a man of faith he is entitled to his religious views, however as a public servant he is also expected to adhere to the cultural public ethics in the area he serves.

As such, his comments on homosexuality, go against the ethical public laws in the area he serves and could constitute a conflict of interest as a public servant, this would warrant legit concern and suspension of duties.

The other two comments do not fall into this category, they are private beliefs, without ethical implications.

He is free, under the first amendment to believe Disney is teaching kids magic is real; and evolution as a belief structure is rebellion against God as Creator; neither belief structure hurts the ethics of those in the area he served.

In my opinion the comments on homosexuality warranted this action, because it infringes on the ethical treatment of public he served; the comments on evolution and Disney do not.

God Bless,

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
I don't see how his wages are relevant.

I included it because it was in the information ... it shows he holds an important job in the city ... it shows what the tax payers are paying for this position to be filled.

I actually find it refreshing that he can talk openly about scripture in sermons in private churches he preaches at, but then treat the public fairly when he is speaking publicly.

The more I read this, the more it looks like propaganda.

In a private church, while serving as a minster of God; he must speak the Word of God.

In a public appearance, while serving as a public servant; he must speak the word of law (ethics).

I would expect this to be considered normal actions.

God Bless,

originally posted by: ElohimJD
and could constitute a conflict of interest as a public servant,

That's the question ... does he have a conflict of interest being in the position that he is in ?? His sermons are strongly worded against Muslims and homosexuals ... and these are the people he is supposed to be helping to take care of.

Can a person be a member of a church or religious group that doesn't like certain other groups AND hold public office? That goes for 7th Day Adventists ... fundamentalist Christians ... Muslims ... Jews ... whatever. Where does the line get drawn between a 'believer' and a person being able to hold public office?

I think it could get tricky.

a reply to: ElohimJD

In a public appearance, while serving as a public servant; he must speak the word of law (ethics). - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

You see no conflict of interest? I certainly do. In cases of conflict of interest, it's the blatant opportunity to violate fiduciary duty that is cause for termination from a public position. Usually it's financial, but wouldn't you agree that the topic of Heaven and Hell is even more important?

Dump him. He's not serving public interest.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: ElohimJD
and could constitute a conflict of interest as a public servant,

That's the question ... does he have a conflict of interest being in the position that he is in ?? His sermons are strongly worded against Muslims and homosexuals ... and these are the people he is supposed to be helping to take care of.

Can a person be a member of a church or religious group that doesn't like certain other groups AND hold public office? That goes for 7th Day Adventists ... fundamentalist Christians ... Muslims ... Jews ... whatever. Where does the line get drawn between a 'believer' and a person being able to hold public office?

I think it could get tricky.

Tricky indeed.

I know for myself, I allow God's Word to rule over my thoughts and actions; and I never project those Words onto others, or expect them to adhere to my way of thinking. As such, when I read about God's definition of sin, I apply it to my thinking; I am to govern myself, and never another human being.

In this mindset a "fundamentalist Christian" could easily agree with scripture, and choose not to think in the manner it defines as sin, regarding their own thoughts and actions; without projecting their belief structure unto mankind (who has been given freedom of religion). By doing this it results in the individual "fundamentalist Christian" actually learning to show agape (self sacrificial love) towards all mankind, even those living in a manner scripture defines as sin. By sacrificing the selfish desire to determine the "correct" manner another human being is to live their free life in this age, the individual shows love (agape) towards one who thinks in opposition to themselves.

"Love (agape) your enemies (those who think in opposition to you) as yourself (those who think in agreement with you)".

By focusing on removing (repenting) of sin found in our own mind, and never that of another, a true Christian can preach against sin in church (group of called out ones, who are in agreement), and love all mankind outside of it (free in this age to live according to what seems right to them); in spirit and in truth.

Unfortunately, all too often the Christian's do not do as they are told by scripture, and attempt to force others into believing as they do in vanity. This is why it is so tricky indeed.

Great thread FF!

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass


You see no conflict of interest? I certainly do. In cases of conflict of interest, it's the blatant opportunity to violate fiduciary duty that is cause for termination from a public position. Usually it's financial, but wouldn't you agree that the topic of Heaven and Hell is even more important?

Dump him. He's not serving public interest.

I agreed with you in my initial post when I said:

"As such, his comments on homosexuality, go against the ethical public laws in the area he serves and could constitute a conflict of interest as a public servant, this would warrant legit concern and suspension of duties."

It certainly is a conflict of interest.

God Bless,

a reply to: FlyersFan
"controversial statements he had made about homosexuality and evolution in online videos and audio clips"
The only thing he should be speaking about publicly is his job as a health director because it is better to be safe than sorry. Everything else should not be held accountable unless it is offensive to the public. I agree with ElohimJD's initial post

a reply to: ElohimJD

As such, his comments on homosexuality, go against the ethical public laws in the area he serves and could constitute a conflict of interest as a public servant, this would warrant legit concern and suspension of duties.
-

His religion also tells him to not judge a person no matter how he believes about the action. He can care for and love a homosexual and treat them fairly without having to believe that their way of life is acceptable to God.

I can't see why he cannot do his official duty and also teach as instructed by Jesus to his followers in the bible as he believes he should.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
I don't see how his wages are relevant.

I included it because it was in the information ... it shows he holds an important job in the city ... it shows what the tax payers are paying for this position to be filled.

This would be no different than if you were a public employee and openly spoke as a Catholic against abortion and other things you hold to be wrong. it is your right to hold values and still do your job and why would you have to hid your belief.

Can a person be a member of a church or religious group that doesn't like certain other groups AND hold public office? -

Such as persons who believe in birth control and abortion.

here in socal the guy has no chance. he should have kept quiet. unless he is looking to get a settlement for being terminated.

meaning of Hollywood : magic wand of DECEPTION.

and this is why the Disney magic wand.

a reply to: ElohimJD

By focusing on removing (repenting) of sin found in our own mind, and never that of another, a true Christian can preach against sin in church (group of called out ones, who are in agreement), and love all mankind outside of it (free in this age to live according to what seems right to them); in spirit and in truth.
-

preaching to only those who already believe certainly would never have spread the word. What then does the parables mean about the master returning and the slave having the same sum of money and not having multiplied it. The followers we instructed to be vocal to everyone especially non believers.
Hiding your light under a bushel no less.

Have the opposite opinion of this guy and you get the keys to the clubhouse. How ironic.

After reading the articles and looking at the video the following can be stated:

If the offending comments were made before the man was hired into that position, then the fault lies not with him, but with the people who offered him and gave him that job. Most jobs, when you go in and apply, there is a waiting period, where the employer does a bit of a back ground check, vets the prospective employee, and makes a determination if the person is the best possible candidate or not for the position. If it turns out that he made these comments before his appointment to the job, then no, they should not hold him accountable.

But if he made such after his appointment, then yes they would and should remove him from said position.

The city of Pasadena is caught between a rock and a hard spot, as they cannot just fire this man, without just cause. If he has demonstrated in doing his job that he has acted unprofessionally, or discriminates against someone, then they have to document and show just cause or they could end up in a law suit and stand to lose millions of dollars. California has some of the toughest employment laws, that tend to run and favor the employee.

So there is the problem at hand, they hired him, failed to vet him, did not do a back ground check, now they have to deal with the mess that is coming up. If anyone should lose their job, it should be the person who failed to do their job and not realize that this was going to embarrass the city when this stuff comes up.

a reply to: FlyersFan

No, been a public figure working with people of all background and believes, he is not suited to push his religious views on the public, he is not a state nominated preacher and neither a spiritual adviser.

He is pay by the state tax dollars and the tax dollars comes from tax payers with all different religious views.

In the other hand he is a seventh day Adventist and I have personal experience with that religion as I grew up with a father that was one and still is, many have narrow minded view of society and believes makes them extremely fundamentalist and borderline fanatic, the business owners that have the power in their pockets should demand his resignation.

I love my father very much, but darn he is so rooted on his religion that we don't dare challenging him.

If the idiot doesn't even believe in evolution he's too stupid to hold that job.

He should be fired.

originally posted by: amazing
If the idiot doesn't even believe in evolution he's too stupid to hold that job.

He should be fired.

That's your opinion. Evolution has not been proven.

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit
Have the opposite opinion of this guy and you get the keys to the clubhouse. How ironic.

Its pretty incredible though, isnt it?

I mean, these things are results of long term plans to do exactly what is being accomplished. No reason to go into that here though.

I think we will have actually evolved if we can understand that everyone has private beliefs that may be perceived by the public to be a conflict of interest. The most important part, of course, would be whether or not it actually impacted his job and not whether or not other individuals are projecting their own incapacity to do the same. What an interesting tool to oust thy enemies, eh? People want separation of "church" and state, until of course, it becomes politically viable to use the association as a means to an end.

Look at how many distractions there have been as of late too, people are missing so very much that is going on... The issue is that darn puppet-master is quite well hidden. The people just dance according to how their strings are pulled, so its more a matter of finding who is pulling the strings, than cutting them. If we simply cut the strings, most people wont even be able to walk on their own.