It is true that what Kersey wrote would likely be offensive to most homosexuals. That doesn’t mean there was anything wrong with him saying it. There was nothing hateful about Kersey’s words, certainly nothing about the inherent value of a person or anything wishing them ill will. The claim that what he said is the same as saying a racial slur or cursing all homosexuals is preposterous. Disagreement is not hate. 

The former officer, 19 year-old Jacob Kersey, began working for the Port Wentworth Police Department near Savannah, Georgia, in May 2021 and was reportedly doing well — until his Facebook post caused him to be placed on administrative leave. It’s not the first time social media posts have resulted in problems for police officers, but the content of this post was radically different. While some officers have been fired for posting racist, hateful, or obscene content, Kersey’s post was stating orthodox Christian beliefs.
Kersey spoke with John Wesley Reid about his experience:
God designed marriage. Marriage refers to Christ and the church. That’s why there is no such thing as homosexual marriage.
The following day, he received a call from his supervisor letting him know that he had received a complaint regarding the post and told Kersey to remove it. Kersey refused, but was later contacted by Lt. Justin Hardy, who said that the Port Wentworth Police Department did not want to be held liable in a “use of force” interaction with an LGBT person. Kersey continued to refuse to remove the post.
The next day he was called by Maj. Lee Sherrod and told he was being placed on administrative leave while the department launched an investigation.
Kersey says that Police Chief Matt Libby told him what he posted was the “same thing as saying the N-word and ‘[expletive] all those homosexuals.’”
Kersey also said that Capt. Nathan Jentzen told him Kersey’s free speech “was limited due to my position as … a police officer.”
After a week of paid administrative leave, Kersey’s active status was restored. In a letter dated January 13, Maj. Sherrod, the department’s human resource director, stated that after a review of Kersey’s known social media accounts, including a Christian podcast he had run for years, “we did not find sufficient evidence to establish a violation of any policies.”
However, the letter continued, the views he had shared “would likely be deemed offensive to protected classes” and could raise “reasonable concerns” about his ability to serve the LGBT community “objectively.” Any failure on his part to be seen as objective could cause him to be terminated.
While he would not be fired, Kersey says he was told to not post anything that could be deemed offensive on social media. Kersey says he was told that he could post Scripture but could not post his “interpretation or opinion on Scripture if it was deemed offensive.”
Read More
Related Posts:

As we in the PCA continue to deliberate about contentious and important matters of human sexuality – and about homosexuality in particular – we will hear the well-worn arguments, “We have the study report…We have the Bible…We have the Book of Church Order. We don’t need added clarity when we have so many resources that speak to this issue already.” What I am arguing is that we need a Book of Church Order (BCO)that speaks with “straight talk” to the issues facing us. The majority of mainline Protestants – such as our Presbyterian cousins in the PCUSA – thought they were being pastoral and accommodating when they asked for “chastity in singleness” from their LGBTQ-identifying ministers. We see that such “pastoral” accommodation did nothing to protect the Church from a compromised ministry. 

“Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.” Proverbs 16:18
For the second year in a row, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) has sent down overtures regarding the sexuality of ministers to the presbyteries. Overture 29 presented to the 49th General Assembly passed on the floor of the Assembly and was referred to the 88 presbyteries of the PCA as Item 4. Along with a related proposal (Item 5), it has received overwhelming approval from across the spectrum of the PCA. Indeed, leaders of the Gospel Reformation Network[1] and the former leader of the National Partnership[2] have both expressed their desire to see these approved and added to the BCO.
Unfortunately – or fortunately, depending on your opinion – Overture 15 presented before the 49th Assembly passed by a much narrower vote and has now failed to achieve the requisite 2/3 majority of affirmative votes from the presbyteries (as Item 1) to proceed to a final ratification vote at the 50th General Assembly in Memphis. For some reason, the unity around PCAGA49 Overture 29 splits when it comes to PCAGA49 Overture 15. Why is that? Perhaps it is due – in TE Richard D. Phillips’s supportive words – to the “straight talk” expressed in the proposal contained in the Overture. The proposal contained in PCAGA49 Overture 15 as passed by the Assembly sought to amend Chapter 7 of the Book of Church Order (BCO) by adding a new paragraph, “Men who describe themselves as homosexual, even those who describe themselves as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy by refraining from homosexual conduct, are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America.”
My argument for supporting such a proposal is primarily historical. Scripture calls us to be people who remember their history. By studying another denomination with a common history and once-similar polity handling this issue, I hope to show that the PCA is on dangerous ground if we do not incorporate more robust language in our BCO regarding issues of sexual sin for church officers.
Before moving forward with a crash course in the history of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) (hereafter, PCUSA) and LGBTQ[3] ordination, I would like to respond to a legitimate criticism that many will make. Some will perhaps respond to my concern as follows: “We have nothing in common with the Liberalism of the Mainline Protestant denominations.” Yes, the PCA started in 1973, ten years before the PCUSA united the northern and southern Presbyterian churches. Yes, both those churches were decidedly Liberal in theology and much more liberal socially at that time than the PCA, and the PCUSA of today is certainly far more liberal than the PCA.
However, as the history of LGBTQ ordination in the PCUSA will show, there were enough conservative and moderate believers in the PCUSA to curb LGBTQ ordination for over forty years. There even continues to be renewal movements within the PCUSA.[4] What ultimately led to the full acceptance of LGBTQ ordination in the PCUSA was a failure on the part of the denomination to add “straight talk” language regarding human sexuality to their Book of Order. Like us, as we will see, the PCUSA had Scripture and the Westminster Standards, but they decided not to change their other authoritative constitutional document, the Book of Order. Consider what has since become of them. Their history is a warning for the PCA.
Troubling Hermeneutics in the North 1970
Our history lesson begins in the United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (The Northern Presbyterian Church; hereafter, UPCUSA), when a study report, “Sexuality and the Human Community,” was presented to the General Assembly. The “Sexuality and the Human Community” is a fascinating report. The Northern Presbyterians were more liberal than their Southern cousins (the Presbyterian Church in the United States; hereafter, PCUS). While informing the reader that they turned “repeatedly to the theological issues and questions of Biblical tradition which have informed the church’s view of human sexuality,” they also, “found ourselves relying heavily on the social and behavioral sciences. Insights from psychology and psychiatry about the workings of sex influenced us to think often with criteria of psychological health in mind” (italics mine, page 6).
The report continues on a shaky foundation as the authors wrote about their research into sociology, “We frequently found ourselves challenging the conventional wisdom of the Christian community concerning sexuality, only to find that those conventions were too often the culture-bound wisdom of part of the community: to wit, the white, Protestant, and middle-class part. But the Christian community encompasses a wide diversity of racial, ethnic, and cultural groups, and therefore a wide variety of assessments of sexuality and sexual behavior.” (pg 7).
The report continues with recommendations for ethical considerations:

Difference between homosexuality as “a condition of personal existence and homosexualism as explicit homosexual behavior” (18).
The biblical condemnation of homosexuality in St. Paul, in context, shows, “It is not singled out as more heinous than other sins, but is discussed with other forms of behavior which betoken man’s refusal to accept his creatureliness” (18).
The context of St. Paul’s condemnation suggests that he objected to “the element of disregard for the neighbor more than he did to acts in themselves…Perhaps pederasty, homosexual prostitution, and similar neighbor-disregarding forms of behavior ought not to overshadow our entire response to the human condition of homosexuality” (18, these arguments have historically and linguistically been debunked even among some liberal scholars. For example, see the works of William Loader).
No one is exempt from the experience of alienation from God. Thus everyone may experience reconciliation in Christ (19).

What is fascinating is that given all the above statements, the authors of the report still recommended that pastors and theologians study this subject, “so that the desire for change can be more effectively elicited and encouraged…homosexual behavior is essentially incomplete in character. It is therefore important to guard against the development of fixed homosexual patterns during childhood and adolescence…one function of such an understanding is to spare young people from thinking they are destined to homosexuality because of some developmentally normal experience” (19). This was a study committee report that was received at the General Assembly and circulated widely in the UPCUSA.
1975-1978 The Task Force to Study Homosexuality (UPCUSA)
In 1975, an openly gay man came before the Presbytery of New York City having received a call from a congregation and thus seeking ordination. The debate on the floor of the Presbytery lasted hours. The end result was that the Presbytery petitioned the General Assembly for “definitive guidance” regarding the issue of homosexuals and ordination. As one commentator who voted in favor of the man argued, “the Book of Order (i.e., the Church’s constitution) didn’t mention homosexuality because it was immaterial and irrelevant.” Several other presbyteries sent overtures asking for “definitive guidance” as well. The 1976 General Assembly formed a Task Force (study committee) to provide “definitive guidance.”
The Task Force completed its study in January of 1978. The resultant report included a minority report. The recommendation from the majority of the Task Force was to let presbyteries make their own decisions in all aspects of ordination. The minority report, supported by 5 of the Task Force’s 19 members, advised against allowing homosexuals to be ordained. The General Assembly of 1978 approved the minority statement. Below are some highlights from the official summary of the Task Force’s majority report, which is available in its entirety here:

Homosexuality should be primarily viewed as affectional attraction, not as actions or behavioral patterns. Homosexuality is just the basic attraction and preference of part of the population. It is not “consciously chosen nor readily susceptible to change.”

Read More
Related Posts:

Written by David T. Crum |
Monday, May 6, 2024
My story on researching Stonewall started in 2013 when I proposed a graduate-level research paper on the Civil War, proposing a paper titled God’s Friend or Foe: The Confederate Army. Being a Yankee, I aimed to prove how wrong the Confederates were. My professor kindly informed me I would be shocked by the Christianity found in the Confederacy and urged me to proceed carefully, though he said I could still proceed. I thought about it and revised my paper to the Confederate Army and God. My professor was right, and I came out shocked—most of what I thought I knew was wrong.

Dear Readers:
Hello, my name is David T. Crum. Several of you might have read some of my articles in the past two years on The Aquila Report. I have even received friendly emails and notes from others disagreeing with me on some issues.
I have had the privilege of having many articles on Stonewall Jackson published by The Aquila Report, Log College Press, and the Scottish Reformation Society.
My story on researching Stonewall started in 2013 when I proposed a graduate-level research paper on the Civil War, proposing a paper titled God’s Friend or Foe: The Confederate Army. Being a Yankee, I aimed to prove how wrong the Confederates were. My professor kindly informed me I would be shocked by the Christianity found in the Confederacy and urged me to proceed carefully, though he said I could still proceed. I thought about it and revised my paper to the Confederate Army and God. My professor was right, and I came out shocked—most of what I thought I knew was wrong.
Doctoral work studying George W. Truett actually led me to further studies on Stonewall Jackson. In 2021, I began exploring Jackson and his Christian faith. Jackson was not just a believer but a staunch follower of the Presbyterian faith, a detail that resonates with many readers.
There are several books on Jackson and his beliefs, though I sought to accomplish something different with my book, Stonewall Jackson: Saved By Providence. I aimed to defend his beliefs and prove he was no “fanatic” yet a biblical, born-again Christian. Yes, even in Jackson’s day, biblical Christians had a reputation as fanatics, not much different from today.
Sure, Jackson is a controversial figure today because of his connection to the Confederacy. Though, he should not be. Those acquainted with him know he fought for Virginia and initially aimed for a unified United States.
Researchers have thoroughly examined Stonewall’s military brilliance, bravery, and amazing leadership skills. Once you start studying Jackson, it is apparent that the man correlated all aspects of his life to his faith. He had a tough life and experienced much sorrow and heartache, but his faith never wavered and served as an evangelistic tool for others, most notably the soldiers who fought under him.
His dream was to have a Christian army, a realization he knew was impossible in this fallen world. It, however, did not mean he gave up on Christian standards and principles dictating behavior and actions within his ranks.
Throughout my book, I present Jackson’s life from childhood to his untimely death while corresponding with the Westminster Standards and leading Presbyterians of his day. The aim is simple: Did Stonewall Jackson fall in line with notable voices of his day? Was he a biblical Christian or a fanatic?
Scottish Presbyterian and John Knox expert Dr. Douglas Somerset stated of Jackson, “He [Jackson] was noted as an eminent Christian and was a supporter of the religious revival in the Confederate Army in 1863.”
While Christians should never idolize any man, we can learn from and appreciate those who walked before us. Was Stonewall Jackson perfect? Of course not, and he would undoubtedly admit so. He is, however, a Christian role model for us today.
As a self-proclaimed patriot, most of my ancestors fought for the Union in the Civil War. Like many of you, I have descendants (several great-grandfathers) who were patriots and fought in the American Revolution. I am even a direct descendant of Pilgrim Father John Robinson (my great-grandfather was a Robinson and adopted as a Crum).
That said, Stonewall Jackson is one of my favorite people to study in history because of his Christian faith. He was not a traitor…
As most know, firm believers existed on both sides of the conflict. My research primarily centers around Jackson’s faith, with few military accounts provided. It is not a theological or military history book, but perhaps best described as a devotional. There is some valuable information for those who want to learn a bit about theology and history.
Stonewall is still a legend, especially in Scotland and the southern part of the United States.
As we know, even in our country, people still frown upon any association with Stonewall. I have experienced this, having articles on Stonewall denied by conservative academic journals and publications. I have even had colleagues and family ask, “Are you sure you want to publish this book in today’s society?” I have been called a Yankee and Lincoln lover by some, and a supporter of the Lost Cause argument by many others.
So, to address the elephant in the room, yes, Stonewall Jackson was associated with the Confederacy and slavery. I make it clear in the book that the slavery practiced in the U.S. was unbiblical and a tragic stain in American history. We can never condone the enslavement of any person. I also recognize that Stonewall is misunderstood here.
In the end, I take the position of Dr. Douglas Somerset, who firmly stated the following about Jackson:
Satan tries to push human cultures from one extreme to another. In one generation, slavery is callously tolerated; in another generation, the condemnation of slavery becomes excessive, as if there were no other sin in the world. Many of those most vehement in their opposition to historic slavery support the destruction of unborn children in the womb. While denouncing the sins of the past, they defile their hands with the equally heinous sins of the present.
I ask my fellow Christians to consider reading my book. Stonewall Jackson’s Christian life offers lessons for all of us to learn.
Stonewall Jackson: Saved by Providence can be ordered here and here.
David Crum holds a Ph.D. in Historical Theology. He serves as an Assistant Professor of History and Dissertation Chair. His research interests include the history of warfare and Christianity. He and his family are members of Christ the King Church, in Easton, Maine.
Related Posts: