Prominent American university attempts to squash religious freedom

[Faxecura]

Debate Over Religious Freedom Comes to a Head at Vanderbilt - FIRE

This evening, Vanderbilt University will hold a town hall “discussion” about its new nondiscrimination policy that prevents belief-based student groups from making belief-based decisions about their leadership. Vanderbilt effectively is discriminating against political and religious groups that seek to promote a common message.

so far, Vanderbilt has ignored the concerns of FIRE; the Christian Legal Society; the Roman Catholic Bishop of Nashville; the American Center for Law and Justice; more than half a dozen law professors; leaders of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Association of Evangelicals, and the Southern Baptist Convention; and no fewer than 23 members of the U.S. Congress, all of whom had the same or similar objections to the policy. Vanderbilt's response on these substantive questions? Silence.

Students and alumni have been galvanized to action. A group called Restore Religious Freedom at Vanderbilt has formed to oppose the new policy, and is even running radio ads in Nashville opposing the change. The Vanderbilt College Republicans have joined them and have produced a video featuring students who oppose the new policy.

Perspective from a student at Vanderbilt: #WeAreVanderbiltToo

I like nondiscrimination. I like openness and diversity. What I don’t like, though, is what this policy is asking religious organizations to do.

In the words of Dean Bandas, a “group must sign a form affirming they will comply with university policies, which require that membership in registered student organizations be open to everyone and that everyone who desires to do so has the opportunity to seek leadership positions in those organizations.”

By signing on the dotted line, a religious organization is saying that it will not discriminate based on religious beliefs when making leadership decisions.

Local Media Coverage: Vanderbilt defends nondiscrimination policy for student groups | The Tennessean | tennessean.com

[Pegg]

Originally Posted by Faxecura

Debate Over Religious Freedom Comes to a Head at Vanderbilt - FIRE



Perspective from a student at Vanderbilt: #WeAreVanderbiltToo



Local Media Coverage: Vanderbilt defends nondiscrimination policy for student groups | The Tennessean | tennessean.com

doesnt Americas constitution uphold religious freedom?

[Heathen Hammer]

It's a private institution, and can set its own bylaws.

Exactly the same way the Cub Scouts can discriminate against gay members, if they so chose.

[Kathryn]

I agree with Heathen Hammer. Private institutions should be allowed to be as stupid as they want to be when it comes to bylaws - within the limits of the law.

Note to the religious - spend your tuition money elsewhere if Vanderbilt's ridiculous bylaws offend you.

[LeftishBritInPA]

First off it is obvious where your sympathies lie since you posted from a right wing blog which happens to be owned by a student at the university, but not from any mainstream source. Five minutes of going on Google and I was able to find this:

EDITORIAL: Vanderbilt in the right: Nondiscrimination policy ensures equality for all - Inside Vandy: Editorials

Tomorrow, nearly a year of conflict surrounding Vanderbilt's nondiscrimination policy's perceived incongruence with religious freedom comes to a head when university officials hold a town hall meeting to address student, faculty and staff concerns about the policy.

We support the university's decision to enforce its preexisting nondiscrimination policy and hope that the Vanderbilt community can accept the policy for what it is: protection for all against discrimination by university-sanctioned groups.

Chancellor Zeppos made it patently clear in his Jan. 20 email to the student body that the university, "requires all Vanderbilt registered student organizations to observe our nondiscrimination policy. That means membership in registered student organizations is open to everyone and that everyone, if desired, has the opportunity to seek leadership positions."

So first off the non-discrimination policy had already been in place for quite some time, and it was the religious groups who were violating it by discriminating against non-religious/LGBTQI individuals.

Second, the policy applies to all groups. Religious groups aren't being "singled out" - but I the religious have a strong defense mechanism. When someone wants you to stop discriminating you claim that you're the ones being persecuted.

Also the University wasn't "squashing religious freedom". The constitution is not a legally binding document to anyone who has not mutually signed it, and therefore certainly does not entail any agreement two third parties, in this sense a university and its students. At its broadest sense, it only dictates what the Federal government can and can't do. As a private university they have the right to set whichever requirements they so desire. Not only that, but the amendments are just that: an *amendment* which was not a part of the original constitution. It can easily be amended over again to fit the current needs of our society and indeed there are provisions that can be applied to ensure that everyone's rights are protected.

[Kathryn]

I guess this is a nice policy. Anti-gay rights individuals should definitely be able to join gay rights groups - en masse if they like. White separatists and white supremacists should definitely be able to join the NAACP on campus as well. If enough of them join, heck they can win some elections for officer positions in any number of such organizations. I can't imagine why a white supremacist shouldn't be president of Vanderbilt's NAACP chapter.

Power to the people!

[Faxecura]

Originally Posted by Kathryn

I guess this is a nice policy. Anti-gay rights individuals should definitely be able to join gay rights groups - en masse if they like. White separatists and white supremacists should definitely be able to join the NAACP on campus as well. If enough of them join, heck they can win some elections for officer positions in any number of such organizations. I can't imagine why a white supremacist shouldn't be president of Vanderbilt's NAACP chapter.

Power to the people!

We know it's not going to work that way. The University will figure out a way to allow the atheists, Jews, Hindus, or whatever to keep their "freedom of association" while going after Christians. From what I've seen, whenever they have bylaws like this, it's always directed at the more conservative groups, in practice.

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by Kathryn

I guess this is a nice policy. Anti-gay rights individuals should definitely be able to join gay rights groups - en masse if they like. White separatists and white supremacists should definitely be able to join the NAACP on campus as well. If enough of them join, heck they can win some elections for officer positions in any number of such organizations. I can't imagine why a white supremacist shouldn't be president of Vanderbilt's NAACP chapter.

Power to the people!

I was unawares that White Supremacy was a religion...

[Terrywoodenpic]

It would appear that any "Approved" organisation may not have its own rules of membership.
This is somewhat counter productive. if the Rowing club is open to non rowers...and who could eventually take over the club..
I can see no harm what so ever in having select organisations catering solely to the needs of their own membership. Such clubs in the UK often have a social membership category, but social members can not gain authority over the clubs core interest. Most such clubs require individual election by the existing membership to be able to join.

Neither selection nor qualification are Discriminatory

[Revoltingest]

Originally Posted by Faxecura

We know it's not going to work that way. The University will figure out a way to allow the atheists, Jews, Hindus, or whatever to keep their "freedom of association" while going after Christians.

Contrary to semi-popular belief, we heathens aren't "going after" Xians.
Vanderbilt's policy seems loopy, but I wonder if it would even have any noticeable effect.