Religious intolerance strikes again
- Thread starter Charlie in Dayton
- Start date
Abdul Alhazred
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2003
- Messages
- 6,023
A Baptist college? They may well have at some point.
But this is a case of someone just being gay, not being caught in flagrante.
Oolon Colluphid
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2006
- Messages
- 918
Here in Canada (well, Ontario, anyway. I don't actually know about the other provinces) we have [gritting_teeth]full funding for separate schools[/gritting_teeth]. It sickens me. Every time there is a new school being built or renovations being done to existing facilities, guess who gets the lions share? It absolutely boils my blood to think that my tax dollars are going to support any religious institution! IMO, if they are receiving public funds, then they should damn well start paying property and income taxes! Parasites!
Here in Canada (well, Ontario, anyway. I don't actually know about the other provinces) we have [gritting_teeth]full funding for separate schools[/gritting_teeth]. It sickens me. Every time there is a new school being built or renovations being done to existing facilities, guess who gets the lions share? It absolutely boils my blood to think that my tax dollars are going to support any religious institution! IMO, if they are receiving public funds, then they should damn well start paying property and income taxes! Parasites!
Do public schools pay property and income taxes? Damn parasites.
-Elliot
Oolon Colluphid
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2006
- Messages
- 918
That is absurd. The public school system is a government institution. The catholic church is not.
bignickel
Mad Mod Poet God
How about if a diner refused to allow blacks in? Or if they did: only thru a side door marked 'Colored'?
I've been resisting the race comparisons because they're a real cliché - but no less instructive for that! I think that there's an excellent case for goods and services provided by private organisations (whether or not they receive any public money - and lots of educational establishments have mixed funding) to be made mandatorily available irrespective of certain factors (race, gender and sexual orientation, amongst others). Few people think that there should be NO such laws - the question (as always!) is where to draw the line.
It's all very well saying that organisations which choose to exclude black or gay people will become marginalised over time - that's not going to mean much to black or gay people whose opportunities are reduced NOW.
Fortunately, this sort of discrimination is pretty rare (even in the US). But given that most young people are still significantly under the influence of their parents when making a choice about higher education, it is absolutely specious to make the argument that the young person in question made their bed and they should lie in it.
It's all very well saying that organisations which choose to exclude black or gay people will become marginalised over time - that's not going to mean much to black or gay people whose opportunities are reduced NOW.
Fortunately, this sort of discrimination is pretty rare (even in the US). But given that most young people are still significantly under the influence of their parents when making a choice about higher education, it is absolutely specious to make the argument that the young person in question made their bed and they should lie in it.
Abdul Alhazred
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2003
- Messages
- 6,023
A church may exclude anyone they please, but a church-owned diner would be subject to the same anti-discrimination laws as any other diner.
A school is not a "public accommodation" like a diner, but "theater arts" is not a religious activity per se.
Hence some kind of legal gray area that needs to be resolved.
So leeching is OK as long as the government leeches. Now, what if the government gives it's blessing to a non-governmental institution to leech, is that also OK? -Elliot
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
If that were a legitimate argument, the churches would want to impose their ethics upon you. There are more Christians than atheists. They would win.
Besides that, the 1st Amendment prohibits laws that hinder the free practice of private religion, bigoted or not. That amendment is there to protect the expressions we don't like.
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
Darat...
I agree...
This person has a right to education, no matter what his sexuality is...It matters not...(But i think his choice of college could have been more thought out tho'...........Apparently their sports facilities are pretty crap)
DB
The right to education ends after high school. You don't have a right to a college education as of yet.
Anyway, I'll ask you the same question I asked Darat: What legal theory allows you to restrict the schools admission policy?
Last edited:
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
Ugh I hate "defending" these idiots.
Diners are intended to be open to the public and must follow descrimination laws. A college does not hold itself out to be a public accommodation.
I realize that this answer is unsatisfying, but we as a people need to draw the line between public and private somewhere. Trying to regulate every little detail of someone's life is fascism.
Last edited:
KingMerv00
Penultimate Amazing
Bump
Bump away! I think it's an interesting thread.
KingMerv: It's a shame you're having to defend these idiots; it's always more satisfying to see the idiots defend it themselves (and often defending it rather less convincingly than you!). I respect your attempts to draw a line; it's better than denying the existence of the line in the first place.
I'm intrigued by the question of what anti-discrimination laws apply to private further education institutions. ChristineR said that universities don't have to admit ethnic minorities (I assume she's talking about the US). Is that really true? I don't know the situation in the UK, but would be surprised if that was the case here.
In any event, sexuality is a bit different, a fact that this case draws out. Most people would say there is an inherent contradiction in being black and wanting to attend a university with an explicitly racist philosophy. You could therefore argue that no one's opportunities are being seriously diminished.
However there is no necessary contradiction in being gay and wanting to attend a Christian university (even a relatively fundamentalist one). I have no doubt from his subsequent statements that this student has a very strong sense of his Christian faith. That his education can be seriously disrupted by the university because of what he is (and in the absence of any major breaches of school rules, as far as I know) strikes me as a pretty grotesque breach of natural justice. That doesn't of course mean that it is the law's job to get involved. But it honestly rankles with me to think that he might have no recourse in law. That would feel to me like a failure of the law. I think I would feel the same way if someone joined a college with a racist philosophy and was expelled when it was discovered he had a black great-grandparent.
The guy sounds fairly well-balanced, so it probably won't hold him back. Still, this case really gets me angry. There are people who are a lot more vulnerable than this guy who could have been totally destroyed by this debacle.
Matt
KingMerv: It's a shame you're having to defend these idiots; it's always more satisfying to see the idiots defend it themselves (and often defending it rather less convincingly than you!). I respect your attempts to draw a line; it's better than denying the existence of the line in the first place.
I'm intrigued by the question of what anti-discrimination laws apply to private further education institutions. ChristineR said that universities don't have to admit ethnic minorities (I assume she's talking about the US). Is that really true? I don't know the situation in the UK, but would be surprised if that was the case here.
In any event, sexuality is a bit different, a fact that this case draws out. Most people would say there is an inherent contradiction in being black and wanting to attend a university with an explicitly racist philosophy. You could therefore argue that no one's opportunities are being seriously diminished.
However there is no necessary contradiction in being gay and wanting to attend a Christian university (even a relatively fundamentalist one). I have no doubt from his subsequent statements that this student has a very strong sense of his Christian faith. That his education can be seriously disrupted by the university because of what he is (and in the absence of any major breaches of school rules, as far as I know) strikes me as a pretty grotesque breach of natural justice. That doesn't of course mean that it is the law's job to get involved. But it honestly rankles with me to think that he might have no recourse in law. That would feel to me like a failure of the law. I think I would feel the same way if someone joined a college with a racist philosophy and was expelled when it was discovered he had a black great-grandparent.
The guy sounds fairly well-balanced, so it probably won't hold him back. Still, this case really gets me angry. There are people who are a lot more vulnerable than this guy who could have been totally destroyed by this debacle.
Matt