An Ol' Broad's Ramblings
One Sided Discrimination?
Hastings College of the Law, part of the University of California, rightly prohibits student organizations from discriminating. A Christian group that bars non-Christian and gay students sued the school for denying it funding and access to its facilities. The Supreme Court hears arguments Monday in the case. It should rule in favor of Hastings.
Interesting. A Christian group should be barred from receiving funds because they are a……….Christian group? Well, basically, that’s what the suit is saying. Why would a non-Christian want to join a Christian group? Unless the intent is to disrupt. And honestly, demanding a Christian group accept gays, when if the groups is truly Christian, they couldn’t in good conscience because it would be against the Word of God. Actually, if the Supreme Court wants to uphold the U.S. Constitution, it should rule AGAINST Hastings.
To qualify for official recognition, and receive money from a publicly financed university, groups at Hastings are required to adhere to the school’s nondiscrimination policy, which says that official student groups cannot refuse membership on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or other prohibited factors.
IMHO, the Christian Legal Society should actually sue the school for discrimination against Christians, which they did! But that’s just me.
Under California law, it is illegal for postsecondary educational institutions that receive state money to discriminate on the basis of religion or sexual orientation. The school correctly determined that the law requires it to ensure that its student organization program does not permit discrimination. The school also has the right to pursue its own educational policy of promoting diversity and opposing discrimination.
That word “diversity” has pretty much destroyed society, and actually created MORE discrimination! Receiving state money, means the money comes from the actual TAXPAYERS. The state doesn’t have any money. Well, considering this is Kaliphonyia, the state has less than zero bucks.
Students at Hastings who want to join together in more exclusive arrangements are free to do so. They can form unofficial student groups. But Hastings is right that groups that bear its imprimatur, use its name and logo, and receive public funds must not discriminate.
Do the taxpayers oppose a Christian group upholding their faith? Why would they? Would the taxpayers be opposed to a Chess Club insisting on it’s members to play chess? Simplistic? Yes, but it really is that simple.
The Christian Legal Society is not being denied any First Amendment rights. It is being told that if it wants an official association with a public university and public money, it cannot deny gays, non-Christians or members of any other protected minority equal rights.
What is a ‘protected minority’? Are some people, groups, more equal than others? Do certain groups of people deserve more protection than others? Of course not, yet that is exactly what has been going on, and it’s is more divisive than anything I’ve seen in all my xx years. Obviously, I’m not a lawyer, but I do know right from wrong. Does Hastings? Does the author of this column?
I’m curious. Wouldn’t the Black Law Students Association be discriminatory? How about La Raza Law Students Association? The names of these student groups says exactly what they are, black and “the race” (one of the most racist groups in America, imho). Would either of these groups accept a ‘white supremacist’? If they don’t, will they be sued, too?
