Should Christian groups be forced to accept non-Christians or anti-Christain students as group leaders?

[Riprorin]

Rutgers Unuversity thinks so.

Playing the bias card

 

[StageLeft]

Not if they are private; if they receive public money then yes.

 

[Analog]

of course not.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Not if they are private; if they receive public money then yes.

I doubt that religious groups get any funding from the university.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

A university has every right to deny them the right to run a private club there.

It's the university its facilities they are using, so the university can say what the rules for using it are. If they don't like it they are free to hire their own, private place elsewhere.

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Not if they are private; if they receive public money then yes.

I doubt that religious groups get any funding from the university.

from article:

In September, Rutgers banned a Christian group from using campus facilities and stripped the group of university funding because it selects leaders on the basis of religious belief.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: yellowfiero
of course not.

 

[classy]

LOL. My brother graduated from Rutgers

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Not if they are private; if they receive public money then yes.

I doubt that religious groups get any funding from the university.

from article:

In September, Rutgers banned a Christian group from using campus facilities and stripped the group of university funding because it selects leaders on the basis of religious belief.

Thanks. I missed that.

I don't think that any religious groups should receive funding, but to remove privileges because a religious group selects leaders based on religious belief is, well, moronic.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

They aren't 'forced' to accept non-Christians, they just have to do so if they want to use university funds and facilities. So the question is not really in order here, they can still do whatever they want.

 

[Peetoeng]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Not if they are private; if they receive public money then yes.

I doubt that religious groups get any funding from the university.

They, as a student organization, probably do, or at least get access to use university facility such as a place to meet. But, so do juggling club, campus democrats, young republicans, gay&lesbian organization, a number minority organizations, or even foreign-student clubs etc.

 

[Peetoeng]

Originally posted by: Peetoeng

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Not if they are private; if they receive public money then yes.

I doubt that religious groups get any funding from the university.

They, as a student organization, probably do, or at least get access to use university facility such as a place to meet. But, so do juggling club, campus democrats, young republicans, gay&lesbian organization, a number minority organizations, or even foreign-student clubs etc.

ADD:
I think it is part of the currect culture among academics who tend to be left-leaning

 

[Kadarin]

..Still wondering here why I, a non-Christian, would ever want to join a Christian group..

 

[Walleye]

this is just more liberal bullsh!t.

It is my opinion that no clubs that are formed in the interest to advance an agenda (political, religous, minority and gay/lesbian rights... and so on...) should be allowed to recieve any monies from any public institution. this IS a public institution, or at least recieves public funding? im operating off the assumption that it is.

oh, and i am a christian. but that is still my beleif.

clubs on campus should be only formed and recieve funding if they are sports, intellectual, or are non-controversial clubs.

and why a non-christian would want to join a christian club is beyond me.

oh, and i am all for letting them use campus facilities to meet, as those facilities are owned by the community, and anyone who wants to meet there with a legit reason should be allowed to do so free of charge.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
..Still wondering here why I, a non-Christian, would ever want to join a Christian group..

Hypothetically, maybe you are vehemently anti-Christian. You could use antidiscrimination laws to infilitrate the group and undermine it.

As the article points out "Though written in the bland language of brotherhood, antidiscrimination laws give critics of private groups "a public hammer with which to beat groups they oppose," says Richard Epstein, professor of law at the University of Chicago. They also provide a way for outsiders to reach into a dissenting group to determine its membership, policies, and officers."

Everyone that supports the First Ammendment should be troubled by this.

 

[glen]

Most Universities hold freedom of thought and speech as sacrosanct.
So, forcing a certain point of view(anti-Christian), is contrary to the educational facilities stated purpose.

 

[hdeck]

should the black panthers be forced to accept a white leader?

 

[Riprorin]

Most Universities hold freedom of thought and speech as sacrosanct.

Glen, perhaps in principle, but not in reality.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
They aren't 'forced' to accept non-Christians, they just have to do so if they want to use university funds and facilities. So the question is not really in order here, they can still do whatever they want.

I might agree with you... if the university was enforcing this policy in a fair and uniform manner. But they are not.
From the article: "though the antidiscrimination language here would require a Democratic club to allow a Republican president, a Jewish group to allow a Holocaust-denying president, and a Muslim group to accept a leader who believes in Christianity, animism, or voodoo."
Apparently, they are only targeting Christian groups and that is discrimination in and of itself.

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
..Still wondering here why I, a non-Christian, would ever want to join a Christian group..

To destroy it of course.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
..Still wondering here why I, a non-Christian, would ever want to join a Christian group..

Hypothetically, maybe you are vehemently anti-Christian. You could use antidiscrimination laws to infilitrate the group and undermine it.

Not sure if it varies from campus-to-campus, but on the other side of Rt 1 at TCNJ, InterVarsity by definition wants non-christians to come to meetings and events. An evangelical group isn't doing much if only Christians show up

Additionally, the executive boad at our chapter of IVCF was elected by the IVCF membership. In which case, I see only 2 possiblities: A) The candidate deceives a majority of the group into believing that he/she is of like mind, in which case how would we know they were ineligible, or B) The candidate is open about his/her beliefs, in which case, I fail to see why members of a group like IVCF would vote for them.

If you managed to snow the group until you got elected, you would have to show your true intentions eventually. You would be voted out of office at the end of your term, or if the group is pissed off enough, they could hold an ad hoc election.

It really wouldn't do jack.

Everyone that supports the First Ammendment should be troubled by this.

This is true. The college shouldn't allow this. The writer's comment that if a fundie right-winger tried to strongarm his way to the top of the local GLBT Alliance, there would be rallies and candle-light vigils. The reverse is not true. I frequently griped that when The College Of New Jersey busted out their favorite word, DIVERSITY, I was categorically excluded. In The College's eyes, a white, male, middle-class Christian is not included in diversity. A group celebrating anything else would be accepted and supported. Groups supporting whiteness, maleness and Christianity would be reviled.

Nonetheless I ALSO feel that the college should think twice about funding for these groups. It is TCNJ's explicit policy that they refuse to silence speakers, groups and clubs on the grounds that people disagree with their message. As someone else said, free speech is sacrosanct (good word choice!).

However, while the college will uphold your first amendment rights, they won't fund them. I was the leader of a Christian A Cappella group, registered with the College Union Board, however due to the fact that we A) held auditions and B) explicitly discriminated against non-Christians (although our doctrine was VERY high-level. I was never booted from the group for being accepting of homosexuality, nor was it ever mentioned before or after I lead the group), we were ineligible to be funded from the Student Activity Fund.
Always made sense to me. Every student pays into the SAF, and if we're not going to let every student participate in our group, why should we be entitled to even a penny of the fund?

In that vein, IVCF IS currently SAF funded on the basis that all students are welcome to become members of the group. However, I can see that banning people from the executive board could be construed as not allowing everyone to participate as fully as others. While I think IVCF should still be allowed to be a registered org and to meet and operate on the campus, perhaps they should not be eligible to draw funds from SAF....

 

[axelfox]

But, so do juggling club,

And what school might I find this club ?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I'm going to go to Rutgers so I can shower in the women's locker room. And if they have a problem with it I'll just scream sexual descrimination.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Not if they are private; if they receive public money then yes.

yea

 

[Zenmervolt]

That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. Sheesh. You'd think that with a football team as bad as Rutgers' is that the school would at least have a focus on intelligence.

Seriously though, I'm an agnostic and I think that Christian student groups should be allowed funding and facilities. Here at Pitt we have a pistol and rifle club, they get funding and facilities, should the university withdraw support because the Pistol and Rifle club won't allow an anti-gun person to be president? Should the university Democrats be denied funding and facilities because they won't let a Republican be president? When the exact same logical argument used against the Christian club is applied in other cases, it is clearly absurd. Therefore the logic is absurd and it's not a valid criterion.

ZV

 

[KokomoGST]

I was talking to a few friends about the whole deal with InterVarsity in Rutgers since some of them are InterVarsity Rutgers alums or had friends in the organization. As with InterVarsity and most other Christian or religious groups there isn't really any discrimination in terms of being a member.

However the main point of contention is that the Rutgers IV constitution or whatever you call it says that you have to be a professing Christian to be a leader. That's the thing that Rutgers is focusing in on... seems like most IVCF chapters either have no problems doing so at their university/college or they don't specifically state it.

Like it's been said, the College Republicans would prolly want Republicans as their officers... there's nothing wrong with that. I think it's just overparanoia over the whole church/state thing. Monies used by most IVCF chapters... it's usually from the donations of IVCF alums and the students themselves. I can understand withdrawal of monies more than banning from campus facilities? I guess Rutgers doesn't want a multi-ethnic Christian group on campus??