Fraternity Sues To Keep Out Gays

[all_i_want]

I really like the fact that Harvard doesnt have any fraternities or sororities. Im against the whole idea. why cant guys and girls be in the same organization? when they do that, it becomes a student association or an activity club, which is totally normal. fraternity/sorority system is segregation and its just stupid.

 

[speedracer]

This issue has been addressed before -- by several chapters of Intervarsity over the years who have stated that gay/lesbian students could not serve on leadership. I forget which Boston college initially threw IV off campus, but the ACLU came in on the side of the Christians on that one (in 2000), and did again a few years later when a similar case was brought in another part of the country. I forget the specifics of the latter situation, but the ACLU again seemed to think that private organizations had the right to define membership and governing ordinances.

It was Tufts, if I remember correctly.

The point is that having clubs like these is rather pointless if they don't have the right to control their membership and agenda. BGLTS groups probably wouldn't like being forced to accept a member who went around proclaiming that gay orientation is a choice or that homosexual activity is an abomination, would they?

 

[Do Miss America]

The point is that having clubs like these is rather pointless if they don't have the right to control their membership and agenda. BGLTS groups probably wouldn't like being forced to accept a member who went around proclaiming that gay orientation is a choice or that homosexual activity is an abomination, would they?

What does this have to do with it? How are they being forced to change their agenda? If someone who's Jewish joins their club(don't ask me why they would but so many here are assuming they would ) how does this change their agenda, it doesn't mean they have to change what they talk about or do.

 

[speedracer]

What does this have to do with it? How are they being forced to change their agenda? If someone who's Jewish joins their club(don't ask me why they would but so many here are assuming they would ) how does this change their agenda, it doesn't mean they have to change what they talk about or do.

I said that a support group for gays probably wouldn't take too kindly to being forced to keep a member who actively proclaims his opposition to homosexuality.

Likewise, a religious group that believes strongly in its interpretation of scripture can't be forced to take in members who plan to undermine their beliefs.

 

[all_i_want]

well, how do these 3 guys know if they admitted a gay member he would actively promote homosexuality?

the issue in the original article is not about what a prospective gay member might DO, it is about who they ARE

a person cannot change who he/she is.

we can only be judged by our actions, not our identities.

 

[deep]

I said that a support group for gays probably wouldn't take too kindly to being forced to keep a member who actively proclaims his opposition to homosexuality.

Likewise, a religious group that believes strongly in its interpretation of scripture can't be forced to take in members who plan to undermine their beliefs.

Alpha Iota Omega's status as an official campus group was revoked after it refused to sign the university's nondiscrimination policy.





if there is a gay club on campus they signed.


that means they can not desriminate against a Christian or Muslim that believes their behavior is a sin.

 

[Do Miss America]

I said that a support group for gays probably wouldn't take too kindly to being forced to keep a member who actively proclaims his opposition to homosexuality.

Likewise, a religious group that believes strongly in its interpretation of scripture can't be forced to take in members who plan to undermine their beliefs.

Why would they join? A member of a support group for gays probably attends marches, meeting, etc do you really think someone who opposed would want to do this?

 

[speedracer]

Alpha Iota Omega's status as an official campus group was revoked after it refused to sign the university's nondiscrimination policy.





if there is a gay club on campus they signed.


that means they can not desriminate against a Christian or Muslim that believes their behavior is a sin.

Why would they join? A member of a support group for gays probably attends marches, meeting, etc do you really think someone who opposed would want to do this?

Some ultra-fundamentalist Christian might "infiltrate" a BGLTS club and start trying to "convert" members to heterosexuality.

I don't support this kind of action, but it's not too hard to imagine it happening someday.

 

[all_i_want]

hell, let him try. who cares..

 

[deep]

Some ultra-fundamentalist Christian might "infiltrate" a BGLTS club and start trying to "convert" members to heterosexuality.

I don't support this kind of action, but it's not too hard to imagine it happening someday.

i agree with your point


the only reason this is a story

is because they refused to sign the policy.

the gay clubs and the rest all did.

 

[Do Miss America]

Some ultra-fundamentalist Christian might "infiltrate" a BGLTS club and start trying to "convert" members to heterosexuality.

I don't support this kind of action, but it's not too hard to imagine it happening someday.

Well this person would have to pay the dues and support their club first. Clubs have rules as to who talk when and what so he probably wouldn't get a chance. If he was really that "dedicated" there's easier ways.

So really I think your example doesn't hold water.

 

[speedracer]

Well this person would have to pay the dues and support their club first. Clubs have rules as to who talk when and what so he probably wouldn't get a chance. If he was really that "dedicated" there's easier ways.

He wouldn't have to do his prosletyzing during club meetings; he could do it informally, after the meetings are over, and eventually enough people would become upset that he'd be asked to leave and have no further contact with club members.

Or maybe he'd join, and later on become convinced that homosexuality is "wrong" and seek to advance these views. This is essentially the reverse of what happened to the Tufts Christian Fellowship.

So really I think your example doesn't hold water.

It may be unlikely, but dismissing it is a cheap way to avoid discussing the principles involved.

 

[verte76]

I didn't go out for sorority rush because when I was a freshman in college none of the sororities on campus accepted African-Americans as members. I didn't want to fool with this. I wouldn't join this particular group. They have a right to exist, with as many dumb rules as they please, and we have the right to ignore them if we damn please.

 

[Do Miss America]

He wouldn't have to do his prosletyzing during club meetings; he could do it informally, after the meetings are over, and eventually enough people would become upset that he'd be asked to leave and have no further contact with club members.

So then they get the dues a they lose an asshole. So what?

Or maybe he'd join, and later on become convinced that homosexuality is "wrong" and seek to advance these views. This is essentially the reverse of what happened to the Tufts Christian Fellowship.

This could happen in soroities, fraternities, or any organization. Some of my guy friends were asked to leave their fraternity because they started to speak out how their hazing was immoral and how their fraternity had lost all real meaning.

It may be unlikely, but dismissing it is a cheap way to avoid discussing the principles involved.

I'm not avoiding anything. No one here has presented a real reason as to why these men have a real case.

Let's just say for argument sake someone did want to inflitrate their little club and they did have the power to discriminate based on whatever how would they know? How would they know? Like someone said, there are no religion IDs that people carry around.

Plus everyone's forgetting that frats and clubs like that have rush and they can eliminate whoever they want.

 

[speedracer]

So then they get the dues a they lose an asshole. So what?

Well, if I must spell out the punchline in plain detail...Mr. Ultra-Fundamentalist would claim that he's being discriminated against because of his religiously-motivated views on homosexuality. He'd probably be right, but it'd be rather dumb to force the BGLTS club to accept him if their charter states that their purpose is to help gay people accept their sexuality.

No one here has presented a real reason as to why these men have a real case.

Besides historical precedent and analogies, you mean?

This thread is no longer just about those three guys, who probably should have just signed the nondiscrimination pact and postponed the day of reckoning. It's about college groups and their ability to govern themselves.

Let's just say for argument sake someone did want to inflitrate their little club and they did have the power to discriminate based on whatever how would they know? How would they know? Like someone said, there are no religion IDs that people carry around.

So according to standard nondiscrimination policies, the BLGTS club might be free to dismiss a nonreligious member who wanted to turn the group into a therapy group for changing sexual orientation, but they would not be able to dismiss a member who wanted to do the same if he declared that he was religiously motivated. A rather absurd state of affairs.

Plus everyone's forgetting that frats and clubs like that have rush and they can eliminate whoever they want.

Well, the reason I brought up general frats in the first place is not because they discriminate during rush; it was because they categorically discriminate on the basis of gender. Ultimately, colleges allow them to stay because similar organizations exist for women. In a similar manner, if a gay Christian wants to join a Christian organization, but the evangelical group isn't tolerant of homosexuality, he or she can join a more liberal group or charter one.

The point is, these antidiscrmination statues cut both ways and have the power to undermine college organizations' reason for existing.

 

[Do Miss America]

Well, if I must spell out the punchline in plain detail...Mr. Ultra-Fundamentalist would claim that he's being discriminated against because of his religiously-motivated views on homosexuality.

And he wouldn't have a case. There would be the umpteen amount of members who would be witness.

Besides historical precedent and analogies, you mean?

This thread is no longer just about those three guys, who probably should have just signed the nondiscrimination pact and postponed the day of reckoning. It's about college groups and their ability to govern themselves.

No still haven't seen it. I've seen one historical precedent and it wasn't the same. Ok if it's about college group's ability to govern themselves then they can govern themselves off campus. What's wrong with that. As long as they are on campus they have rules. Just like state governments have a federal government to answer to.

So according to standard nondiscrimination policies, the BLGTS club might be free to dismiss a nonreligious member who wanted to turn the group into a therapy group for changing sexual orientation, but they would not be able to dismiss a member who wanted to do the same if he declared that he was religiously motivated. A rather absurd state of affairs.

That makes no sense. That's like having someone join the chess club and want to change it into a checkers club. Sorry but your analogies just aren't working.

Well, the reason I brought up general frats in the first place is not because they discriminate during rush; it was because they categorically discriminate on the basis of gender. Ultimately, colleges allow them to stay because similar organizations exist for women. In a similar manner, if a gay Christian wants to join a Christian organization, but the evangelical group isn't tolerant of homosexuality, he or she can join a more liberal group or charter one.

Well my campus didn't actually allow frats or soroities on campus due to that and many other issues.

Honestly you can come up with the ifs and, or buts, it's not going to change the fact that you aren't going to join the club unless you want to be in the club. If you're going to join because you have an agenda, discrimination isn't going to stop you any more than not having the discrimination, and lawsuits happen if those safety nets are in place or not.

 

[speedracer]

That makes no sense. That's like having someone join the chess club and want to change it into a checkers club.

That is the whole point. It is absurd to force campus clubs to admit members or adopt viewpoints or policies that would undermine their purposes. You seem to be happy to protect some clubs from this sort of intrusion, but not others.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Alpha Iota Omega has only three members.

kinda says it all

 

[Do Miss America]

That is the whole point. It is absurd to force campus clubs to admit members or adopt viewpoints or policies that would undermine their purposes. You seem to be happy to protect some clubs from this sort of intrusion, but not others.

What? You read something wrong. My point is no one in the club would want to change it to a checkers club, it's not a freaking checkers club, so no one else would go along. So the person joins and is bored or they don't join. They have no case.

 

[speedracer]

What? You read something wrong. My point is no one in the club would want to change it to a checkers club, it's not a freaking checkers club, so no one else would go along. So the person joins and is bored or they don't join. They have no case.

Julie Catalano joined the Tufts Christian Fellowship a while back and discovered she was a lesbian. She applied for a leadership position and was told she could not voice approval of homosexuality as a leader of the group, in accordance with the group's understanding of the Bible. She was told that she could either remain as member and non-leader, or she could change her views and be a leader.

Catalano filed a discrimination complaint with the university, and TCF was decertified by the student government. The university recertified the group a few months later.

So yes, one person can raise a big fuss.

 

[melon]

If racist and anti-Semitic organizations are allowed on campus, then I'd say that homophobic Christian groups have a case.

Melon

 

[speedracer]

If racist and anti-Semitic organizations are allowed on campus, then I'd say that homophobic Christian groups have a case.

Melon

That should be for actual human beings in the student government or university administration to decide, based on the net contribution (positive or negative) they make to campus life.

 

[ILuvLarryMullen]

on second thought why do universities even get mixed up with colleges and fraternities in the first place

 

[speedracer]

on second thought why do universities even get mixed up with colleges and fraternities in the first place

At least at MIT, many fraternities and sororities have a very good record of helping their members cope with academic pressures, throwing non-fatal parties, running community service events and in general being positive forces on campus.

Also, it's not like frats and sororities are the only gender-discriminatory groups are campus. There are also sports club teams and single-sex performing and singing groups as well. Even at Harvard.

 

[Scarletwine]

the ACLU again seemed to think that private organizations had the right to define membership and governing ordinances.

This is the point. UNC is a public university. They are trying to receive public funds and other free services (web pages, ect).

The 3 members are playing the poor little Christians , discriminated and under seige by secular elitist academia. I'm dure they are junded by a Jerry Falwell type organization, Dobson, or some other radical christian organization. This fits right in with their new agenda of assault on universities and playing the victim.

 

[nbcrusader]

This is the point. UNC is a public university. They are trying to receive public funds and other free services (web pages, ect).

The private organization is the fraternity, not the university.

 

[Irvine511]

The private organization is the fraternity, not the university.

i may be wrong, but most fraternities are given university housing and funds, all of which comes from taxpayers.

 

[speedracer]

i may be wrong, but most fraternities are given university housing and funds, all of which comes from taxpayers.

Usually fraternities/sororities (at both public and private colleges) are funded by their members and by their national organizations. If they have a house, it's usually owned by the national organization, and the members pay rent.

The school usually gives frats/sororities a voice in the student government, allows them to reserve rooms on campus, allows them to rush, advertise and hold events on campus, etc.

The point isn't so much about funding as it is about having school sanction and recognition. Many schools (private or public) have sweeping nondiscrimination policies. Nonetheless, they sanction groups that are inherently discriminatory but otherwise seem to serve some positive purpose.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

screw 'em... who the hell wants to join a frat that only has 3 members anyway? their parties must be killer

 

[jick]

U2 have always taken the hard line when it comes to gays, so what's wrong with fraternities suing to keep out gays? U2 have managed to keep gays out of the band for the last 25 years and they are all still the same 4 straight men.

Cheers,

J