If UNC can investigate the decisions of this group to expel someone who is against what they stand for, what's to stop them from investigating a Christian group that expels practicing homosexuals or atheists?
At the same time, UNC gets tax dollars and can't allow "discrimination", and there is the freedom of assembly issue in the mix.
Doesn't a private club have a right to exclude someone--especially if he espouses views totally contrary to what the club stands for? How can you possibly have a campus club/group with any independence if the university gets to determine its membership policies?
I'd fight for the right of NAACP to exclude anyone for any reason it wants...
From the comments:
“I believe Dr. Adams is using this hyperbole to describe the actual account of Psalm100, a Christian A Capella group, asking one of its members to resign for openly embracing homosexuality. Bravo Dr. Adams for turning this situation on its ear. The group operates under a UNC “approved” charter and is exercising the right of any group to restrict its membership to those who conform to its tenets. PS- Psalm100 receives less than $200.00 in subsidies.”
As usual, Mike Adams nails it.
}:-)4
Well I am sure the ACLU wil join in sueing the NAACP over this.
Regardless of University funding - the group should not be allowed to use public property to hold their meetings. You know - like the Boy Scouts.
I was happy to see that my son’s high school has a prayer group that meets on school property once a week. But then I started to wonder, what if an athiest group wanted to hold a weekly meeting? Of course they’d be allowed. Then I was stumped. What would they discuss?
Not to be too stupid here but how the heck did a white segregationist get to join the NAACP college chapter and apparently achieve some office with the group?
Boy, I lucked out. I was about 20% of the way into the article. (I had no previous knowledge about the Christian a Capella group investigation.) Confused, I decided to “jump to the end” and read forum comments, like sometimes we all do. (not unlike reading the “joke” panel in a six-panel comic before you read panels 3-4-5)
Anyway, reading the comments clued me in well before I would have made the mistake of stating opinion about what turns out to be a satirical turned-on-its-ear re-telling of the events in the Mike Adams way.
Then I read the entire Adams piece. Made it all better....
They threw a white segragationist out of the NAACP?
The boy is lucky they didn’t drag him behind a pick up truck.