Page 13 of 28 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 271

Thread: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

  1. #121
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Additionally, I'm no scholar but I'm pretty sure the bibles a rather large book, made up by more than a few individual lines, and that attempting to take a few lines about jesus's personal acts and suggesting that if individuals do not act exactly like jesus in all ways shapes or forms that it is impossible for one to be "christian" in practice.
    Actually, the self-righteousness of the existing religious class (in contrast to their inner sinful behaviors) was a theme that Jesus Christ returned to again and again. That's why there are so many mentions of scribes/pharisees, and it is the underlying message of, for instance, the parable of the Good Samaritan.

    Furthermore, the absolute fallen and sinful nature of mankind is THE MESSAGE OF THE BIBLE. The entire Old Testament is a representation of man's inability to save himself through his own perceptions of righteousness.

    Romans 3:23 is a pivotal verse for evangelicals:

    For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
    That verse, in a single sentence, sums up the very reason that Christ needed to come to earth and die on the cross. It is paramount to evangelicalism.

    By disregarding their own sinfulness before God, and focusing only on the sinfulness of gays/lesbians, these believers bring themselves into condemnation by God.

    Another key aspect of Christian thought is that only Christ is the judge. Someone could easily be a believer in Christ, and feel that they were made by Christ to be gay. Why does this club feel that only a fundamentalist interpretation of doctrine is allowable? If they want university sponsorship, that means that they have to be open to all people who state that they are Christians. Their choice to be so narrow in their interpretation.
    Last edited by Catz Part Deux; 06-30-10 at 03:18 PM.

  2. #122
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Okay, this is weird, and I think I'd like to see the actual rules of this club.

    In one instance it seems to be saying that gays could join, they'd just need to sign the same statement all voting members do that state that regards participation or advocacy of immoral lifestyles as inconsistant with the faith beliefs of the club.
    If this is the case, I feel that in order for the University to refuse to fund them, the UIniversity would also have to refuse to fund any other group that requires a standard of behavior.

    The only exception being if there were members who were actively participating or advocating immoral lifestyles (such as premarital sex or living with their boyfriend/girlfriend out of wedlock, which even without the sex occuring advocates an immoral lifestyle according to Christian beliefs) who were not being removed from the club, while homosexuals were being removed from the club.

    But if the only reason the University denied funding and recognition to this group was over that requirement, and they don't do this with other groups that have similar requirements (many fraternities have behavioral expectations, for example), then I absolutley disagree with the University's decision to not fund the group.

    However, I'm not totally sure I disagree with the court's decision, though, since i do think the University should have some discretion on who gets funded, and the opposite ruling would have prevented them form having that discretion.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  3. #123
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,939

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    Actually, the self-righteousness of the existing religious class (in contrast to their inner sinful behaviors) was a theme that Jesus Christ returned to again and again. That's why there are so many mentions of scribes/pharisees, and it is the underlying message of, for instance, the parable of the Good Samaritan.

    Furthermore, the absolute fallen and sinful nature of mankind is THE MESSAGE OF THE BIBLE. The entire Old Testament is a representation of man's inability to save himself through his own perceptions of righteousness.

    Romans 3:23 is a pivotal verse for evangelicals:

    That verse, in a single sentence, sums up the very reason that Christ needed to come to earth and die on the cross. It is paramount to evangelicalism.

    By disregarding their own sinfulness before God, and focusing only on the sinfulness of gays/lesbians, these believers bring themselves into condemnation by God.

    Another key aspect of Christian thought is that only Christ is the judge. Someone could easily be a believer in Christ, and feel that they were made by Christ to be gay. Why does this club feel that only a fundamentalist interpretation of doctrine is allowable? If they want university sponsorship, that means that they have to be open to all people who state that they are Christians. Their choice to be so narrow in their interpretation.
    All well and good, but its not the states job or the colleges job to dictate how these people perform thier religion.

    This is the problem I think most are having with this.

    The facts its religious to me is irrelevant.

    Should any group [x] that has rules in regards to its membership that require an adherance to a group held belief or behavior in order to have voting rights be able to recieve group funding from a university.

    This could be a religious group forcing members to agree to hold to a specific belief about homosexuality or hell, about working on sundays.

    This could be a political group forcing members to agree to hold specific public views regarding a political view point.

    This could be a racial group forcing members to agree to participate in a certain number of rallies regarding their particular race.

    This could be an honors group forcing members to agree to maintain a 3.5 GPA with no more than 1 class missed a semester.

    This could be a citizenship group making people agree to meeting a certian behavioral expectations.

    Whether you agree with the NEED or the legitimacy of the requirement or not, to me, is irrelevant, what is relevant is the general notion of a group requiring a certain agreement of a belief or behavior to maintain membership.

    Much like people were criticizing Tex earlier for supporting this when he'd be against it for an islamic group, how many people here are simply focusing on "CHRISTIANS!" or focusing on "BAD TO GAY PEOPLE" and would react differently if it was the same situation but with different groups that didn't instill those feelings in you?

  4. #124
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,939

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    If this is the case, I feel that in order for the University to refuse to fund them, the UIniversity would also have to refuse to fund any other group that requires a standard of behavior.
    Yeah, that's kind of what I'm leaning to and what I've been saying. As long as this is evenly enforced by the University I don't have as big of an issue with it.

    The only exception being if there were members who were actively participating or advocating immoral lifestyles (such as premarital sex or living with their boyfriend/girlfriend out of wedlock, which even without the sex occuring advocates an immoral lifestyle according to Christian beliefs) who were not being removed from the club, while homosexuals were being removed from the club.
    According to SOME Christian beliefs. Here's the thing. I don't think its the College's place to determine whether a standard of behavior is legitimate or not, let alone be a theologin. If you want to allow standards of behavior I could make a club requiring people to wear clown noses at all times. The College could think that's ****ing ridiculous, but if they're allowing standards of behavior and its not violating a law they should allow it. Its not the colleges place to say "You're interpriting your religion wrong!"

    The ONLY other way I'd say it would be okay is if the campus has generic laws of its own. For example, lets say its not in a state where sexual preference is a protected class...but in regards to the college itself it IS. In that case, clubs actively saying "Homosexuals can not join" would be against school policy, and would give grounds for the school to act without removing the allowance for standards of behavior. However, if the club had a policy regarding membership that was not DIRECTLY stopping homosexuals from joining, but made it highly unlikely, then I'd say it'd have to be allowed.

    But if the only reason the University denied funding and recognition to this group was over that requirement, and they don't do this with other groups that have similar requirements (many fraternities have behavioral expectations, for example), then I absolutley disagree with the University's decision to not fund the group.
    Yep. Though I've found mixed information in regards to school funding for fraternities. Some do it, some don't. You also get into the dicey situation...what about perks OTHER than school funding, such as housing, use of facilities, etc.

    However, I'm not totally sure I disagree with the court's decision, though, since i do think the University should have some discretion on who gets funded, and the opposite ruling would have prevented them form having that discretion.
    I do think they should have some discretion, I just think it needs to be relatively consistant and measurable. For example, if they wanted to use discretion in giving more funds to larger clubs, that'd be fine. If they want to give more funds to clubs that provide services to the community rather than special interest clubs, that's fine. Its when you get into allowing them discretion of going "We don't like the purpose of your club so we're not giving you money" or "We don't agree with an ideological viewpoint of your club so we're not giving it money" that begins to cause me to give pause.

  5. #125
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    OK, I'm actually reading the court's decision itself right now:

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1371.pdf

    It seems that the school had a policy in place that stated "Hastings requires that [RSOs] allow any student to participate, . . . regardless of [her] status or beliefs. For example, the Hastings Democratic Caucus cannot bar students holding Republican political beliefs".

    An important part of the Decision:

    "Private groups, such as fraternities and sororities,commonly maintain a presence at universities without official school affiliation."

    I see nothing wrong with the decision in light of these facts. I was was under the impression Sororities and fraternities received school funding. If they don't there's no problem here. And using this particular School's rules, it would be impossible for them to receive funding while remaining all-male/all-female.
    Last edited by Tucker Case; 06-30-10 at 03:35 PM.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  6. #126
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,939

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    OK, I'm actually reading the court's decision itself right now:

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1371.pdf

    It seems that the school had a policy in place that stated "Hastings requires that [RSOs] allow any student to participate, . . . regardless of [her] status or beliefs. For example, the Hastings Democratic Caucus cannot bar students holding Republican political beliefs".

    An important part of the Decision:

    "Private groups, such as fraternities and sororities,commonly maintain a presence at universities without official school affiliation."

    I see nothing wrong with the decision in light of these facts. I was was under the impression Sororities adn fraternities received school funding. If they don't there's no problem here.
    Yep, in general, if they're applying this across the board I don't have a huge issue with it...just be consistant as a college. My one question would be regarding JUST beliefs, or behaviors as well? For example a Democrat Club can't hold people to not have Republican beliefs, but what about attending republican rallies? Could attending or organizing a tea party rally get someone kicked out of the Democrat club? If so, then all the club would need to do is change from making people agree to uphold a certain belief to them agreeing to uphold certain actions.

  7. #127
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Yep, in general, if they're applying this across the board I don't have a huge issue with it...just be consistant as a college. My one question would be regarding JUST beliefs, or behaviors as well? For example a Democrat Club can't hold people to not have Republican beliefs, but what about attending republican rallies? Could attending or organizing a tea party rally get someone kicked out of the Democrat club? If so, then all the club would need to do is change from making people agree to uphold a certain belief to them agreeing to uphold certain actions.
    It looks like there is stuff about behvioral requirements being related to things like dues, and a more generalized definition go "gross misconduct". But the rules do not prevent behavrioa standards from what I've seen so far. the link I put up before is 85 pages long, so I'm not entirely certain how much is included.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  8. #128
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    I see that some have had some fun at my expense over my choice of the word "parody" in my last post....I admit that is pretty funny. however, I'd like to substitute that word for 'discernment' and then maybe you all will I am sure know what I meant.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  9. #129
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,939

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    It looks like there is stuff about behvioral requirements being related to things like dues, and a more generalized definition go "gross misconduct". But the rules do not prevent behavrioa standards from what I've seen so far. the link I put up before is 85 pages long, so I'm not entirely certain how much is included.
    See, that's the issue....

    I could think they're the ****tiest most backassword Christians ever that don't understand their own book at all.

    But in general if behavioral requirements are in there if they want to put in a requirement that individuals do not actively without repentence engage in or advocate for lifestyles deemed contrary to the faith the club adheres to then there would be no problem in my mind. The issue would be in making them agree to follow a particular type of FAITH, and then using the faith agreement to regulate action. In the above case one may keep their belief that homosexuality is okay, that homosexuality isn't a sin, that homosexuals should be able to be married, they just couldn't date a man or promote gay marriage.

    By default, it'll likely discriminate against homosexuals, but its a restriction on action not on belief.

  10. #130
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Court: Christian group can't bar gays [and] get funding

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    See, that's the issue....

    I could think they're the ****tiest most backassword Christians ever that don't understand their own book at all.

    But in general if behavioral requirements are in there if they want to put in a requirement that individuals do not actively without repentence engage in or advocate for lifestyles deemed contrary to the faith the club adheres to then there would be no problem in my mind. The issue would be in making them agree to follow a particular type of FAITH, and then using the faith agreement to regulate action. In the above case one may keep their belief that homosexuality is okay, that homosexuality isn't a sin, that homosexuals should be able to be married, they just couldn't date a man or promote gay marriage.

    By default, it'll likely discriminate against homosexuals, but its a restriction on action not on belief.
    I think the point of contention was the following:

    Statement of Faith | CLS

    Was a requirement for membership, and that violates the schools rules for RSO's. They have other groups that receive RSO status that have strong and opposite opinions, so the actual issue wasn't the point of view of the group. It was that they act to exclude anyone who doesn't conform to their point of view. No groups that receive RSO are allowed to do that, according to the rules in place.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

Page 13 of 28 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •