christians sue for right not to tolerate

[lateforwork]

Out of all the places, for Atalnta to be the hub of this is a little ironic, notoriously an enormously unapproving city.

 

[verte76]

I'm actually a little surprised that this is going on in Atlanta. It's a much more liberal city than Birmingham, where I'm from is. If this were going on in Birmingham I wouldn't be at all surprised, but Atlanta? Georgia is a politically schizoid state because it has a population of four million, and two million of these are conservative small town people and two million others are liberal residents of Atlanta. They've had some wacky office holders, most notably Zell Miller. Would you believe that guy gave Georgia a lottery while he was governor of Georgia?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: christians sue for right not to tolerate

unfortunately, this is not true.

it is perfectly legal to fire someone in many states for being gay, whether one is working for a private company or for the government at any level.

the Boy Scouts receive tons of federal handouts, yet they discriminate against both gays and atheists.

as do some universities:

And this gets to the heart of the hypocrisy ~ you pay taxes just as any other American and as such it is your deist given secular right to not be excluded from government funded organisations.

Maybe you should just put all that tax money in escrow until they figure that out.

 

[nbcrusader]

while i don't think this is exactly the issue i was getting at here, i do think it's important to note that colleges have always had unique islands of limited free speech.

since many students board at college, there does seem to be limits on what can be said in, say, a dorm or at a campus party because this is where the student lives, and there is a perceived right not to be harassed in someone's living space. i don't think this extends to the classroom, nor do i think it should, but having been something of an RA for a group of first-year students when i was a junior, we made it very clear that the dorm was a home, and that everyone had a right to feel comfortable and safe.

yes, we were saying that we would not tolerate intolerance, and i saw nothing wrong what that.

There are a couple of issues that would need to be examined regarding a differing standard for college campuses.

First, the dorm is only a limited part of the college experience. I can appreciate the considerations raised by the uniqueness of living quarters. Perhaps such codes need only be applied in that space.

Second, if we look at the dorm the same way we do the workplace (in the context of being free from harassment), I think we would find ourselves restricting far more behavior than originally intended by the comparison. The creation of an environment free from hostility, as we look at all other forms of behavior that create a hostile environment, would demand significant changes on a college campus.

 

[nbcrusader]

now this is getting at what i hoped to discuss.

when does someone's expression of a certain right (in this case, religious expression) become someone else's harassment?

i think we can agree that in a public space, there is little that can, or should be done.

but in settings like a workplace and a university, where do we draw the line between anti-harassment ethics and the freedome to express one's religious beliefs?

is intolerance of intolerance simply another form of intolerance? or is that being too relativist and meta about it? is this just a common sense thing?

Consider what we are doing here: engaging in the free exchange of ideas to address a position that does not have universal support. I think we would be better off discussing the issue rather than preventing one side in an effort to protect young adults.

Silencing an idea has never eliminated the idea. Ideas change in the bright light of day through vigourous discussion. I am sure college students are up to the task.