1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Prominent American university attempts to squash religious freedom

Discussion in 'Religious News' started by Faxecura, Feb 2, 2012.

  1. Faxecura

    Faxecura New Member

    Messages:
    71
    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
     
  2. Pegg

    Pegg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,736
  3. Heathen Hammer

    Heathen Hammer Nope, you're still wrong

    Messages:
    3,137
    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.
     
  4. Kathryn

    Kathryn Most Spoiled Woman Ever

    Messages:
    15,613
    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.
     
  5. LeftishBritInPA

    LeftishBritInPA New Member

    Messages:
    142
    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

    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.
     
  6. Kathryn

    Kathryn Most Spoiled Woman Ever

    Messages:
    15,613
    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!
     
  7. Faxecura

    Faxecura New Member

    Messages:
    71
    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.
     
  8. Mestemia

    Mestemia Advocatus Diaboli Premium Member

    Messages:
    33,011
    I was unawares that White Supremacy was a religion...
     
  9. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Messages:
    11,762
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    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
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2012
  10. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Ignorant Atheist Capitalist Engineer Libertarian

    Messages:
    65,077
    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.
     
  11. Me Myself

    Me Myself Back to my username

    Messages:
    18,848
    It may be legal, but I say it´s wrong.

    If they are talking about membership to RELIGIOUS groups then religious discrimination makes perfect sense.

    The same way you use academic discrimination to accept or not peole into a college. Is just meant to be.

    I say the policy is ridiculous, but maybe I understood it incorrectly?
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2012
  12. Kilgore Trout

    Kilgore Trout Misanthropic Humanist

    Messages:
    22,701
    Personally, I don't understand why a gay person would want to hang out with a bunch of small-minded, ignorant bigots anyway. But, I suppose they should have the freedom to do so if they want.
     
  13. Falvlun

    Falvlun Earthbending Lemur Staff Member Premium Member

    Messages:
    10,493
    You (the OP) do realize that this protects Christians from being discriminated against in other clubs too, right?
     
  14. LegionOnomaMoi

    LegionOnomaMoi Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,607
    Amusement?
     
  15. Me Myself

    Me Myself Back to my username

    Messages:
    18,848
    I am not following.

    I think the idea should be that religious groups could pick their leaders basing themselves on religious qualities.

    Non-religious groups should indeed be forced to not discriminate in base of religion though.

    It´s like, a chess group´s leader needs to play chess. He is going to be discriminated about that for taking leadership, not about reilgion. A religious group should discriminate in base of religion. It makes sense.
     
  16. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Ignorant Atheist Capitalist Engineer Libertarian

    Messages:
    65,077
    Why? Tis obvious!
    Same reason that needy women marry the wrong men....
    To change them.
    (It works so well.)

    Seriously though, I've found that bigoted folk can sometimes be influenced to be less so.
     
  17. Falvlun

    Falvlun Earthbending Lemur Staff Member Premium Member

    Messages:
    10,493
    You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you don't want to be discriminated against based on your religion, then you can't discriminate others based on their religion.

    I agree with the principle. The law is just that you can't deny people access because of their religion. So, yes, some no-nothing atheist could be admitted to your Christian group. But he'd still have to abide by your rules, ie, disruptive behavior could be grounds for being kicked out.

    Likewise, the rule doesn't say you have to elevate the atheist to leadership positions. It just says that he should be given the opportunity like anyone else. There are (or at least should be) other criteria for a leadership of a club than just his religious affiliation, like whether he is a good organizer, whether he displays knowledge of the club and the topic, whether he is a good ambassador for the club, etc. Just like the chess noob probably won't be elected to lead the chess club, the atheist probably won't be elected to lead the Christian club.
     
  18. Drolefille

    Drolefille PolyPanGeekGirl

    Messages:
    3,418
    Religion:
    Unwilling agnostic
    Usually these rules prohibit discrimination based on protected classes. This doesn't mean that non-rowers can be president of the rowing club, it just means that the rowing club can't prevent a gay, christian, Indian, woman from a member of their club.

    A recent similar case involved a Christian singing group expelling a member for being gay. But because they couldn't expel him for BEING gay, they expelled him on the grounds that he didn't adhere to the code of conduct which prohibited homosexual activity. Weaselly as hell, and the gay student was himself a Christian IIRC, he certainly was a singer and wasn't there to cause trouble but to participate.

    (FOUND IT!)
    The Daily Tar Heel :: UNC Christian a cappella group ousts gay member
    They may have technically gotten away with that one, assuming the case is settled, but that is what this is typically for. Is there something different about this school's rules?
     
  19. Koldo

    Koldo Incredible Member

    Messages:
    7,150
    I am afraid i don't understand what this has to do with that quote.
    Considering i share the opinion expressed on that post, i would appreciate a clarification.
     
  20. Willamena

    Willamena Just be there, doing that

    Messages:
    32,034
    It's not about joining the group --if a gay person wants to join an anti-gay group, he does so of his own accord. The policy is just about electing leadership. If a Christian group happens to be composed of mostly Christians, the non-Christians shouldn't be discriminated against.
     
Verification:
Draft saved Draft deleted