Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Courts to Hear Appeal of Christians Who Want to Exclude Gays In Their Religious Student Group
Baltimore Sun ^ | 12/7/2009 | David G. Savage

Posted on 12/07/2009 11:07:45 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Washington - The Supreme Court agreed today to hear an appeal from a Christian student group in San Francisco which refused to admit gays and lesbians and decide whether the group's right to religious liberty and freedom of association can trump a university's ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The case, to be heard next year, could set new rules for campus groups across the nation.

The University of California's Hastings College of Law says its officially recognized student groups must be open to all of its students. The law school also has a general non-discrimination policy which applies to student groups and programs. It forbids discrimination based on "race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, disability, age, sex or sexual orientation."

Five years ago, the Hastings chapter of the Christian Legal Society was told it could not continue as a recognized student group at the law school if its officers refused to pledge to abide by the non-discrimination rule.

For its part, the leaders of the Christian student's group cited its national policy which said, "In view of the clear dictates of Scripture, unrepentant participation in and advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle is inconsistent with an affirmation of the Statement of Faith" demanded by the Christian Legal Society.

Because the Hastings chapter would not abide by the university's policy, it lost its recognition as an official student group. This is turn meant the campus would not pay travel costs for the group's leaders to attend national meetings. The group also lost its right to use reserved rooms for meetings and, it was excluded from some newsletters or mailings that were sent to students at the law school.

(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: christian; christianity; christianright; christianstudents; docket; fourthamendment; gay; highereducation; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; lawsuit; scotus
Lawyers for the group filed suit, contending that it was unconstitutional for a state-funded law school to deny official recognition to a religious group because of its "core religious viewpoints." It suit said the law school had violated its freedom of "expressive association" as well as its rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion, all protected by the 1st Amendment.
1 posted on 12/07/2009 11:07:45 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I’m sure the gays don’t want to join these groups at all...it’s all about forcing an issue.Kind of like Shannon Faulkner...remember her?

-Shannon Faulkner was the first female cadet to enter The Citadel. Faulkner enrolled after a successful lawsuit against the military academy. She joined an otherwise all-male class on August 15, 1995. After four hours of the military indoctrination training, she spent the remainder of the first week in the infirmary before voluntarily resigning....-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_Faulkner


2 posted on 12/07/2009 11:16:59 AM PST by massmike (...So this is what happens when OJ's jury elects the president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Hate to say it but, disband and have more of a loose group of “friends”.

If it isn’t formal they can’t tell anyone what to do.


3 posted on 12/07/2009 11:21:23 AM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: SeekAndFind

“This is turn meant the campus would not pay travel costs for the group’s leaders to attend national meetings. The group also lost its right to use reserved rooms for meetings and, it was excluded from some newsletters or mailings that were sent to students at the law school.”

Well I don’t think it is a surprise that the university wouldn’t pay travel expenses or include materials from this religous group in university paid newspapers. I think they could at least offer meeting space at token fee to deal with that issue.


5 posted on 12/07/2009 11:40:22 AM PST by 1776 Reborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
Hate to say it but, disband and have more of a loose group of “friends”.

The question then becomes -- can you use campus facilities to meet as a loose group of "friends" if you are not formally registered as a recognized student group ?
6 posted on 12/07/2009 11:40:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind (wH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 1776 Reborn

That is one main reason why colleges like Grove City College in Pennsylvania and Hillsdale College in Michigan REFUSE to take any Federal money ( not even Federal tuition grants for their students ). The had the foresight to see Uncle Sam butting in on their autonomous affairs.

Grove City College (A Christian College) recently disciplined a Senior majoring in Molecular Biology for actually working as a porn star in violation of the school’s “morality clause”, which every student were required to adhere to.

Had this kid been a recipient of Federal aid or the college been a grantee of Federal aid, this would have been a public affair that would involve the courts in DC.


7 posted on 12/07/2009 11:46:16 AM PST by SeekAndFind (wH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Sounds like a good move.


8 posted on 12/07/2009 12:01:48 PM PST by 1776 Reborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“unrepentant participation in and advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle”

This includes more than just being gay. It includes herterosexual couples living together, students having sex prior to marriage, guys that go to strip clubs, and people that view porn on the internet (all of which are, if not openly promoted, at least “tolerated” by mainstream Christians in the USA.)

If they are including all of the above in their definition of immoral lifestyle, then I don’t see how this is a discrimination against gays, as their sexual immoralitly isn’t singled out above any other sexual immorality.


9 posted on 12/07/2009 12:23:50 PM PST by Brookhaven (http://theconservativehand.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Shanon Faulkner? Oh, yes, I now remember her/him, thanks to your reference.


10 posted on 12/07/2009 12:38:33 PM PST by Bigg Red (Palin/Hunter 2012 -- Bolton their Secretary of State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Considering that the right to free exercise of religion is enshrined in the First Amendment, while the right to homosexuality is defined ...nowhere, this shouldn’t even be a contest.

But it will be.


11 posted on 12/07/2009 12:40:25 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The University of California’s Hastings College of Law says its officially recognized student groups must be open to all of its students. The law school also has a general non-discrimination policy which applies to student groups and programs. It forbids discrimination based on “race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, disability, age, sex or sexual orientation.”

- - - - - - -
So the school violated its own nonn-discrimination policy by discriminating against a group based upon its religous beliefs.

Yeah. O...K...

Sadly, this type of thing has been used quite a bit on campuses across the country as a way to ban conservative and Christian groups.


12 posted on 12/07/2009 12:46:19 PM PST by reaganaut (ex-Mormon now Christian - "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brookhaven

This includes more than just being gay. It includes herterosexual couples living together, students having sex prior to marriage, guys that go to strip clubs, and people that view porn on the internet (all of which are, if not openly promoted, at least “tolerated” by mainstream Christians in the USA.)

- - - - -
I think you meant to say “mainline” not “mainstream”.

Mainstream Christians, such as Evangelical groups do not promote or tolerate such behavior. I know my church certainly does not, nor any other Evangelical churches I know either.

However, some of the mainline churches (so call because they were near the railroad tracks), Episcopalian, Methodists, Presbyterians, ELCA, do currently subscribe to a more liberal moral theology.


13 posted on 12/07/2009 12:51:32 PM PST by reaganaut (ex-Mormon now Christian - "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Considering that the right to free exercise of religion is enshrined in the First Amendment, while the right to homosexuality is defined ...nowhere, this shouldn’t even be a contest.

Be careful what you wish for. If these students are successful in this case, the University is going to be forced to fund the Islamic Jihad Society.

14 posted on 12/07/2009 12:51:53 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut
So the school violated its own nonn-discrimination policy by discriminating against a group based upon its religous beliefs.

There comes a point in time when the state CANNOT remain neutral on every issue. Those who say that the state can consistently remain non-discriminatory do not understand that there comes a point when one HAS TO discriminate.

The state will have to determine if there are CORE AMERICAN VALUES it has to live up to.
15 posted on 12/07/2009 1:10:45 PM PST by SeekAndFind (wH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: author

“The University of California’s Hastings College of Law says its officially recognized student groups must be open to all of its students.”

Tell it to the Muslim Students Association.


16 posted on 12/07/2009 1:12:17 PM PST by DPMD (~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
If these students are successful in this case, the University is going to be forced to fund the Islamic Jihad Society.

See my above post. The issue if that comes up will be this --- AT WHAT POINT DOES FREEDOM TO PRACTICE RELIGION CONFLICT WITH AMERICA's BASIC VALUES ?

This of course ASSUMES that America was founded on some core values. If you don't have them, then anything goes.
17 posted on 12/07/2009 1:13:36 PM PST by SeekAndFind (wH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

I meant mainstream Christians (including those that attend evangelical churches), not mainstream churches.

I think you can make a legit case that the beliefs (as practised in the real world) of even evangelicals is often laxer than what is taught in the church they attend.

The divorce rate among evangelicals is the same as the population as a whole. I suspect you’ll find the percentage of evangelicals that commit adultery, have sex outside of marrige (before and after), and who view porn is a long, long way from zero (it probably isn’t as high as the population in generaly, but zero? No.)

My point was that the group wasn’t discriminating against gays, but had set a standard that many Christians don’t meet also.


18 posted on 12/07/2009 1:16:52 PM PST by Brookhaven (http://theconservativehand.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That’s not very Christian.


19 posted on 12/07/2009 1:27:45 PM PST by TheSuaveOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheSuaveOne
That’s not very Christian.

I anticipate your explanation regarding what specifically you are referring to...
20 posted on 12/07/2009 1:34:30 PM PST by SeekAndFind (wH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I guess I should have been more specific.

The group’s descrimination of gays and lesbians.


21 posted on 12/07/2009 1:36:36 PM PST by TheSuaveOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheSuaveOne
The group’s descrimination of gays and lesbians.

If the group accepts a gay or lesbian struggling with his inclinations, but ACCEPTS the Orthodox Christian teaching the the gay lifestyle is sinful, THAT is Christian. However, if a group DOES NOT accept a gay or lesbian who insists that the gay lifestyle is acceptable and not sinful, THAT Is NOT UNCHRISTIAN. It *IS* in fact orthodox CHristianity.

Christians love the sinner but do not condone the sin, and homosexual acts ARE sinful.
22 posted on 12/07/2009 1:42:10 PM PST by SeekAndFind (wH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
If the group discriminates against all sinners, you would have a point. I am just guessing here, but I'd be willing to bet that it's only the sinners who are homosexuals that they are not allowing in.
23 posted on 12/07/2009 1:46:09 PM PST by TheSuaveOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: TheSuaveOne
If the group discriminates against all sinners

One major DIFFERENCE. There are sinners who INSIST what they do is not sin. If I am struggling with sin ( be it fornication or homosexuality) and I AGREE that it is sin and sincerely want help to change my ways, then I should be supported.

If I fornicate or am an actively practicing homosexual and INSIST that what I do is NOT sinful, then I should be dis-fellowshipped ( Expelled from fellowship).

So I disagree with you. They WILL accept those homosexuals who are Christians but struggling with their weaknesses. They WILL NOT accept those homosexuals who insist that what they practice is NOT SINFUL.
24 posted on 12/07/2009 2:44:33 PM PST by SeekAndFind (wH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

I said free exercise of religion. Not subsidized practice thereof. Within the First Amendment context, if the university is funding Christian groups, it can be considered obligated to fund other religious groups as well. However, if all it is doing is providing space, then that is the only obligation it has to any other group.


25 posted on 12/07/2009 2:48:36 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
I said free exercise of religion. Not subsidized practice thereof. Within the First Amendment context, if the university is funding Christian groups, it can be considered obligated to fund other religious groups as well. However, if all it is doing is providing space, then that is the only obligation it has to any other group.

According to the article, they are complaining about not receiving financial subsidies that go to other student groups.

26 posted on 12/07/2009 2:55:06 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It is a real challenge and I don’t think if you are in open opposition to a group’s views you should attempt to undermine them by feigning a desire to join something which would be obviously antithetical to your own views.

However, if there is no formal organization then the whiners have nothing to complain about.

I actually just talked myself out my won idea. Fight em’!


27 posted on 12/07/2009 4:44:55 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Tolerance doesn’t mean we have to let homosexuals infiltrate meetings of believers and disrupt the proceedings.

The whole thing is absurd. Of course a Christian group should be allowed to limit membership to Christians!! What’s next? Girl Scouts can’t limit membership to girls?


28 posted on 01/16/2010 11:10:41 AM PST by ConservaLiv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ConservaLiv

Oh your post makes too much sense. LOL


29 posted on 01/16/2010 11:34:23 AM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson