<p>The outrage here is over what Wake Forest’s policy could, in theory, squelch. Perhaps it will squelch something that shouldn’t be squelched. But right now, it hasn’t squelched anything, and that’s the only story I’ve seen in this thread. So really, there’s nothing to refute…except the hysteria.</p>
<p>In college life some verbal exchanges happen that aren’t always easy to deal with. In many cases, these things can be handled between the students before involving administration. Sometimes they can be truly teachable moments when one person says to another face to face: this is hurtful, or when stepping in to defend a friend who is being hurt somehow. </p>
<p>Truly purposeful derogatory events and statements should be reported as should persistent offensive behavior, but I think it would be unfortunate if students reported absolutely everything that bothered them to the college. This could result in students being disciplined for things that might be handled less punitively, and it could take away an opportunity for the students to learn how to resolve some things in a civil manner themselves. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>However, there may issues that are happening on the college campus, which are not yet front page, but real, and taken seriously by others.</p>
<p>Bowdoin College is but one example:</p>
<p>Pull Quotes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Source: <a href=“Bowdoin College Says Gays Must Be Allowed to Join and Vie for Leadership in Christian Groups on Campus | U.S. News”>Bowdoin College Says Gays Must Be Allowed to Join and Vie for Leadership in Christian Groups on Campus | U.S. News;
<p>A more in-depth article in the National Association of Scholars - a different angle and source: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Source: <a href=“Bowdoin's Crackdown on Religious Liberty by Michael Toscano | NAS”>http://www.nas.org/articles/bowdoins_crackdown_on_religious_liberty</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If a gay Christian can run for office and be elected by the other members of the group, what’s the problem?</p>
<p>I hope that examples of restrictions on those with carefully thought out ethical systems (which may be viewed as biased by those of different or no religious beliefs) are less common at elite universities which are supposed to allow a great degree of intellectual freedom. During college exploration we only saw a few cases - some minor examples at Harvard (restrictions on on-campus cultural activities for Christian groups that did not apply to non-Christian groups, this was obviously prior to the more disturbing anti-Catholic event in May originally sponsored by the Harvard Extension Cultural Studies Club see <a href=“Amid outcry, black mass at Harvard is called off - The Boston Globe”>Amid outcry, black mass at Harvard is called off - The Boston Globe) and the other was Vanderbilt’s policy to restrict groups (mostly Christian) who have certain common leadership requirements from posting fliers or news or meeting on campus (one of the Vanderbilt profs describes it here <a href=“http://www.carolmswain.net/2013/03/an-insiders-account-vanderbilts-universitys-war-against-christian-groups/”>http://www.carolmswain.net/2013/03/an-insiders-account-vanderbilts-universitys-war-against-christian-groups/</a>). At most of the engineering schools we visited (e.g. MIT) - didn’t seem like they would care what a person’s belief system was, more apathetic than some of the Universities mentioned in other threads on this topic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Simple - To run for office, one has to be a member. There are christian groups who outright do not believe in homosexuality and thus would not want a person with such beliefs as a member. I support the group’s right to hold members to the support and promotion of its beliefs.</p>
<p>There might be groups who do not want non-white people in them (let’s say, white supremacist groups). Should they also be allowed to close their membership to anyone who isn’t white?</p>
<p>I see the exclusion as equivalent.</p>
<p>All the black, Asian, whatever student groups are open to people of all races. I suppose a white kid is unlikely to win a leadership election in such a group (as I imagine a gay student might be unlikely to win one in a conservative Christian group), but they are welcome to show up and try.</p>
<p>Why shouldn’t a gay Christian student be able to do the same? </p>
<p>If there were a group on campus that declared, based on its religious views, that black students could not be members or leaders, I doubt if there would be many people around to defend them. I think what some people don’t get (yet) is that in many segments of our society, the same attitude has developed with respect to sexual orientation. It can be a shock to discover that your honest, religiously-based views are now seen by many people as morally similar to racism.</p>
<p>Plus, students at Bowdoin are still free to join organizations that discriminate based on sexual orientation. They just can’t do it under the College’s imprimatur.</p>
<p>I note, with passing interest, that Bowdoin still has a Catholic student group…</p>
<p>They do have a right to exist and meet. They just don’t have a right to official recognition because of the nature of their exclusionary policy. that make sense to me.</p>
<p>Edit–cross-posted. And to add, any religious group with the same policy would get the same response. Conservative Christian groups do not hold a patent on discriminatory policies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yup, no problem with that. Freedom of association and all. But the group at Bowdoin also wants official recognition from the college and a share of the student activity money that every Bowdoin student must ante up for through a mandatory fee. Should a gay Bowdoin student be forced to help fund a group that refuses to accept him/her as a member?</p>
<p>You can sub “gay Muslim” or “Muslim woman who refuses to wear a hijab” for my comments above.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do not see the exclusion, as equivalent. </p>
<p>Discrimination based solely on race is not a right protected by the Constitution; the freedom of religion is. And, yes, if someone has a religion with such a belief, his belief is protected under the First Amendment. One may not like it, but that is his right to have that belief and exercise it as part of his group.</p>
<p>(To be fair, it is even more technical than I state above because the Constitution applies to government actions and limits, not private group actions and limits, but that is another whole discussion. The point is, though, the private group does have the right to discriminate.)</p>
<p>We’re also now talking about two different things. A lot of universities have non-discrimination policies for organizations that want official recognition (and money). It certainly can cause some issues, although in real life it’s probably not that often that a gay student wants to join the Baptist Students Association. Speech rules are a different question, and there I think colleges have to be very careful, at least if they also believe in academic freedom.</p>
<p>There are white supremacist religious groups.</p>
<p>yes they do, but I don’t think any group as a “right to be recognized by a college” .</p>
<p>One other note: the analysis of this situation is quite different if you are talking about public colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. </p>
<p>And the same goes for a conservative who does not want to support liberal groups. A straight person who does not want support LGBT. And a Hillel member who does not want to support a pro-palastinian group. </p>
<p>I will answer your implicit question - I have always been a proponent of letting students choose how to distribute their students fees, on a personal level. It is the colleges that refuse to institute such a policy. But, colleges are free to do what they want. </p>
<p>What I do not like is many colleges use the system to try and force certain behavior and beliefs with this “everyone pitches in argument.” It is a convenient excuse… Change the system and the excuse goes away and their ruse would be up.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not all Christians are Catholic, so its existence is not representative of other christians who are not Catholic.</p>
<p>Well, since so many religions do discriminate according to their beliefs, the solution seems obvious: let them fund themselves. No tax breaks, no contributions from student fees, no space on campus unless it is distributed evenly across all groups.</p>
<p>What I meant with respect to the Catholic group is that I don’t understand why Bowdoin recognizes a group that practices sex discrimination so blatantly. Could it be that in practice these rules don’t actually cause that many issues?</p>