<p>It is deeper than that. They are trying to qualify out of ignorance, as they do not understand the faith, clearly. At least, the athletic teams have coaches who understand the sport and conductors who understand the music, and they choose people who meld and mesh with the teams and music groups.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not in the least. The clubs are not open to all.</p>
<p>If someone does not understand or cannot play the music or sport, they will not be allowed to join. Thus someone who does not understand a group’s faith and who cannot support (aka play) the tenets of the faith should not be allowed to join if the group finds the person’s contribution antithetical or disruptive to its cause. </p>
<p>Be my guest - get a student to try to join a sports team and a music group without knowing the sport / music or without agreeing to follow those groups’ rules. Well, why waste time, as the answer is the student would not even be entertained once the student’s ignorance and non-compliance are understood. </p>
<p>I’m sorry @awcntdb but at Bowdoin they ARE open to all. Check the link - you do not have to know how a ride a horse to join the club equestrian team and you need never have rowed or sailed to join those either. Ditto the music clubs - they are all linked in my reply above.</p>
<p>On the thought experiment above - let’s extend it. Say there was a majority male college. There is a small women’s group. A bunch of male students join en mass. A male student runs and the other male students elect him president of the women’s group.
Fair, right?</p>
<p>@scholarme This is not an esoteric thought experiment. It has happened. A similar example where prejudice was enabled, not prevented, by the rule changes which adversely affected local chapters of some large national Christian organizations (but in this case enabling prejudice against a non-Christian religion).</p>
<p>Recently (as a result of these rule changes groups have been forced to sign), “Hillel, the largest Jewish student organization, reports some local chapters have elected non-Jews”</p>
<p>@OHMomof2 - You missed a very important part of my post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It does not matter if one cannot play or if one is a star and can still join. I guarantee you that no student would be allowed to join any group, if that student does not first agree to follow the rules of that group (practice schedule, dress code on the road, GPA requirements etc.).</p>
<p>If a student openly says he does not agree with the rules of a team or group and tells the coach or conductor he will not follow these rules, there is ZERO chance of that student being allowed to be a member. Therefore, the same should go for faith-based groups and their religious tenets, because religious tenets are the exact same as sports teams’ or music groups’ operating guidelines.</p>
<p>EDIT: I think an important point to be made here about sports teams and music groups is that there are multiple levels of agreements that a student must agree to in order to join. One thing that sports teams and music teams have is synergy, and they reject anyone who disrupts said synergy. It seems weird that other groups should not be afforded that same courtesy to maintain synergy and integrity within their groups. </p>
<p>What about the varsity Volleyball team? Why is that not open to all? Why can varsity sports qualify members and clubs can’t? </p>
<p>Seems like it is OK with the Bowdoin administration to qualify based on skill or talent but not based on beliefs. Hence my assertion that this is clearly targeted at faith-based groups. </p>
<p>Also seems to me the administration is saying, " hey students, we don’t think you are capable of governing yourselves. You need our help. We’ll tell you how to pursue your interests and beliefs appropriately". </p>
<p>In going back over the New York Times coverage of this, I was pleased to see more cooperation to try to help these groups which are banned from campus at Vanderbilt:</p>
<p>“About one-third of the 35 religious groups on campus [including some of the largest apparently] have refused to sign and are no longer recognized by the school; … and the campus Hillel has even opened its building for meetings of one of the Christian groups.”</p>
<p>The irony of course in the case of Vanderbilt was that the loss of these large campus groups was caused by prejudice at a fraternity (who kicked out a member they shouldn’t have) not misbehavior by a campus wide religious group like the Catholic Student Association or Hillel or Intervarsity. I wonder in the other cases whether there even was a reason to confront these groups. I really have trouble imagining Intervarsity being much of a problem to anyone. They seemed nice enough, pretty harmless group, not pushy, met once a week (?) and small groups had bible studies in various dorm rooms I think - at least when I was in college. Presumably the trigger that banned these national groups at any of the colleges was not their misbehavior or doing anything illegal, but more a broad rule change with unintended consequences on a few of the larger national student religious groups ?!</p>
<p>In any case, it was nice to see groups like Hillel trying to help out some of the displaced groups.</p>
<p>It is not difficult to see unintended consequences and go back and make an amendment. I believe many colleges are more than comfortable with the effect, even if unintended. </p>
<p>If something happens at my company that leads to unintended consequences for employees, I do not let it continue to disrupt employees’ lives; it is not good for the environment, and I change it to something that makes more sense. As for the colleges, there is little effort to change to something more sensible.</p>
<p>awcntdb - you may be confusing club sports and musical groups with ensembles that are part of a graded music major curriculum and varsity sports. They are not the same thing and follow different rostering and other rules and expectations. They are, however, open to student of all faiths and orientations.</p>
<p>@awcntdb Interesting that the rules on campus groups don’t have this problem in most colleges, public or private, so I have trouble imagining why the colleges referenced earlier don’t fix the unintended consequences as Ohio State did (and similar to what you suggested). I ran into this example in the news coverage today. Ohio State simply clarified its rules for student groups to make them non-discriminatory to both gays and to religious groups. Simple.</p>
<p>They do allow eligibility criteria for officers though:
“A student organization formed to foster or affirm the sincerely held religious beliefs of its
members may adopt eligibility criteria for its Student Officers that are consistent with
those beliefs”</p>
<p>Also see their state law on this at <a href=“Section 3345.023 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws”>http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3345.023</a> (also linked to from their guidelines) which makes it very clear that religious groups can not be forced to deny their beliefs or conduct guidelines: “No state institution of higher education shall take any action or enforce any policy that would deny a religious student group any benefit available to any other student group based on the religious student group’s requirement that its leaders or members adhere to its sincerely held religious beliefs or standards of conduct.” (this is similar to what the US Supreme Court has ruled in the past as well)</p>
<p>Seems pretty clear, pretty logical to me, and this is a public university (obviously private universities can do what they want, but I find it ironic here).</p>
<p>@2018RiceParent I am not surprised. Historically that tends to happen - a majority swarms the unwanted minority.
Unless there are rules (laws) that protect the minority, they are pretty much out of luck.</p>
<p>The varsity volleyball team, any other sport (varsity, club, whatever), the college orchestra, any other musical group, and student organization (if officially recognized) is open to every Bowdoin student. Anyone can try out for a varsity sport or musical group. Anyone can be elected/appointed as a leader in these groups. There are no requirements that you be gay/straight/black/white/asian/blonde haired/blue eyed/whatever. Immutable (look it up) characteristics CAN NOT be a determining factor in whether you are allowed to join a group or team. You want to have a group that doesn’t let lefties join? Have at it, but you won’t get college funding or be allowed to do the officially sanctioned stuff that recognized groups do. Please note: this WILL NOT mean that your group is “banned.” Sorry to yell, but I’ve already pointed this out several times in this thread, and folks still say that Bowdoin “banned” this Christian group that chooses not to adhere to college guidelines. Didn’t happen. Won’t happen. Stop the histrionics.</p>
<p>Of course, if you’re not a good volleyball player, you probably won’t make the team. But you can practice and get better. The same principal applies to the violinist trying out for the orchestra who last took lessons in fourth grade. Sorry, the school just doesn’t have room for everyone who wants to be on the team or in the orchestra. But you’re making a huge mistake if you’re equating not being a good volleyball player or violinist with being gay or being black (or left handed). You can see the difference, right?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yup. Guess what? This happens every day all across the country. A company can choose not to hire someone because they don’t have the right skills or talents, but doing so based on religious beliefs or any number of immutable characteristics would be illegal. A bank can choose not to give a loan because someone may be a bad risk financially, but they can’t do so because of gender or race. And Bowdoin’s policy is clearly not targeted at faith-based groups because it applies to all student organizations. Every Bowdoin student must be allowed to join and be eligible for a leadership position, or the group will not be recognized. There is no different treatment for faith-based groups. There is no “targeting.” And plus, with the volleyball team and the orchestra, it’s not the Bowdoin administration that’s doing the qualifying, it’s the coaches and the conductor (I guess). As far as the administration is concerned, everyone is qualified.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where on earth do you get the idea that the Bowdoin administration is saying this? The members of the group are free to pursue their interests and beliefs and choose their own leadership, as long as there is no discrimination based on immutable (there’s that word again) characteristics.</p>
<p>Sorry if I cross posted with anyone. It took me a while to type this.</p>
<p>@2016RiceParent: I know that at some Hillel’s, some non-Jews have served on boards. But show me where this is a result of some rule change at the host university, and that this is the result of some malicious non-Jews trying to subvert the mission of Hillel.</p>
<p>What I’ve read about this is that it is the result of the changing attitudes of Jewish students. To quote from the Jewish Federations of North America "“Most of the students that we have are not interested in doing Jewish with other Jews,” Feigelson told JTA. “They’re interested in doing Jewish with their friends who are doing Catholic and Puerto Rican and Turkish – their friends and their family. The challenge for us is how do you create expressions of Jewish life that students will deem to be authentic at the same time as they are not exclusive or tribal.”</p>
<p>Why the assumption that religious groups do not take their religion, as seriously as varsity teams take their sport? Why the automatic demotion that a religious group is non-serious and casual like a club sport? This is part of the disrespect for religion that people have, which I mentioned in post #236 - they think they can tell others how seriously to take their religion. </p>
<p>OK, I guess it needs to be said - many, if not most, religious groups take their religion and its tenets, as seriously as a varsity team takes its sports and its rules. In reality, I would say the religious groups are even more serious because, as stated in my earlier post, there are religious beliefs, which simply cannot be compromised, and followers hold fast to their faith. On the other hand, varsity sports change their rules all the time to follow practices of the day, which are in vogue. </p>
<p>@skrlvr I don’t have any personal experience (am not Jewish) but the coverage indicated that the changes were recent. I personally don’t think that I, as a non-Jew, could fairly understand their complex (and sometimes VERY sad) experiences and serve as one of their campus leaders. I did visit synagogues with Jewish friends while in college to try to understand them better, and I found that very interesting, but don’t believe that it is fair to have non-Jews running a Jewish group (I can understand non-Jewish advisors, board members, and/or social coordinators but that is different than president or vice-president)</p>
<p>So what’s the coverage you are talking about? And was this unwanted by the Hillels on whose boards the non-Jews served? That is your implication. But given the quote I gave above, this is a change coming from those within Hillel itself.</p>
<p>I really don’t think that there is even a minority of students on campus who are getting ready to go after these organizations by attempting to hijack the leadership, as the though experiment above. I don’t think you really understand student life.</p>
<p>Do you know this about groups at Bowdoin? If members don’t take their Japanese drumming or online gaming seriously enough they’re kicked out? I seriously doubt that is the case but if you know differently please share.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because religious groups are the same as club sports in the school structure of Bowdoin. They exist under the same rules.</p>
<p>If I took religion as seriously “as a varsity sport” I’d probably choose a religious college and stop messing around in the minor leagues of club religion.</p>
<p>Well, I’ll just put it out there. In some cases, the “religion” people are following is full of hypocrisy. And I am speaking here only of Christianity–because it is what many of us know. Some of the evangelical denominations CLEARLY pick and choose the parts of the Bible that appeal to them, while patently disregarding others and behaving in a very un-Christlike manner. (As an aside, I believe this is why so many “lapsed” Christians are inspired by Pope Francis, while many churchgoers in certain denominations have concerns about what he is saying.) And there is such a strong connection between certain Christian sects and certain political platforms that it is impossible not to be skeptical. Look up “dominionism” if you want evidence of the connection between some of these ideological platforms.</p>