Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Mollie's post about the newest SCOTUS decision on religious liberty and recent Ricochet discussions about morals legislation, particularly relating to the issue of gay marriage, make this an opportune time to discuss a bill that is in committee in Congress.
I wonder if Ricochet members think this bill is morals legislation? H.R. 998, with 150 co-sponsors in the House, would ban discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students (or those perceived to fall into any of the aforementioned categories) in any school that accepts federal funding. There is no exemption for religious or other private schools. (This is comparable to Title IX legislation and regulations relating to gender discrimination.)
Is this bill about freedom, morality, or both? How does it go together with the recent SCOTUS decision?
- Comment (24)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Dec '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
If religious and private schools want to take money from the government piper, they're obligated to dance to his tune.
Hillsdale College made its decision long ago.
Besides, what's "moral" about discrimination?
Feb '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Whatever the bill is about, after passage it will turn into something else.
In this too.
Edited on January 11, 2012 at 8:33pmRe: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Nobody's Perfect: If religious and private schools want to take money from the government piper, they're obligated to dance to his tune.
Hillsdale College made its decision long ago.
Besides, what's "moral" about discrimination? · Jan 11 at 11:30am
I am certainly happy about Hillsdale's decision to avoid government funding!
I didn't say discrimination was moral. But it seems to me that banning it is about morality; the state is saying that the practice of discrimination is immoral and hence prohibited.
Why allow religious denominations to discriminate if it is immoral?
Oct '10
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
This violates freedom of association. Destroying places where people feel safe is not a good idea in my mind when it comes to promoting social acceptance of a particular group. I'd put in an exception for private colleges with explicit honor codes, on the theory that they serve a specific customer base, and so long as they are open about it it's fine.
Besides, the thought of nihilistic activists invading conservative universities makes me sick. It will make non-heterosexual students at those universities less accepted, a lot less accepted. You do not promote tolerance by threatening and discriminating against the wider group; that group might follow the new rules, but it will never accept those you wanted it to tolerate in the first place.
Jan '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Just curious, but is purposeful discrimination against anyone by an entity accepting federal funds now permissible? No legal constraints now exist? Would this lead to other such legislation, i.e., a bill that specifically prohibits murdering lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender human beings?
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
There are legal constraints now. Federal law and regulations prohibit discrimination on the basis of race and gender. Contract law mandates that students receive the education and relevant protections found in documents like catalogs and handbooks.
I don't know if further legislation would result from the passage of this bill--it is certainly a possibility. It seems to me that this act would effectively prohibit private schools (and teachers at these schools) from maintaining that homosexual activity is wrong for instance.
Apr '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
If it is like Title IX will it then require equal number of sports scholarships for LGBT athletes? This could get interesting.
Jul '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Can a white Christian male get a break. I always wanted to be a protected class.
It would appear that religious schools are backed in to a corner here. Would this apply to Muslim schools as well? I cannot wait for a transgender homosexual burkha wearing student demanding her rights openly.
Dec '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
It would appear that religious schools are backed in to a corner here.
If religious schools want to discriminate against gay people, they're free to do so - they're just not free to take taxpayer dollars. Gay people pay taxes, too.
Nov '10
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
"And yet this is what it's come to. This is what it's come to in contemporary
America. Everybody's broken off into these petulant little Travis Bickle
tribes. Everybody walks the perimeter of their own damaged self esteem ever-vigilant
against an incursion by They, Them. The Other Guys. Everybody's touchy and
everybody's encouraged to be touchy, everybody that is . . . except me: the
White Anglo-Saxon male. I'm everybody's [CoC violation]. Black people think I'm
oppressive and physically deficient. Women think I'm oafish and horny. Gay
people think I'm overly macho and latently homosexual. And Asians think I'm
lazy and stupid. Hey, you think you've got an ax to grind? I'm [CoC violation] Paul
Bunyan over here, okay, folks?"
- Dennis Miller
Jan '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Nobody's Perfect: If religious and private schools want to take money from the government piper, they're obligated to dance to his tune.
Hillsdale College made its decision long ago.
Besides, what's "moral" about discrimination?
Two things:
"He who pays the piper calls the tune" ... isn't exactly the sum total of political theory, is it?
Jul '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Good Points KC, all three of them.
Dec '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
"He who pays the piper calls the tune" ... isn't exactly the sum total of political theory, is it?
I'll stick with Hillsdale on this one. It would be interesting to hear from Paul Rahe.
Dec '10
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
After reading the bill, it appears to me that the main concern here is bullying. Now, harassing anyone for any reason is verboten in the public schools. The trick (and I speak from personal teaching experience here) is catching the bully. So, most of the bill bans what is already banned, although I guess if your school doesn't do a good enough job, you'll lose government funding. Looks like some reporting will be involved. How do you report that you have stopped bullying?
Jul '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
I want Prof Rahe's opinion too. Some textbook my daughter had to read employed a pro Muslim section that included how awesome women were treated in Islam. Last I checked, the feds and state took my money to spew that garbage to my kid along with all sorts of pro LGBT propaganda that is not my cup of tea at all. There is a point where freedom from discrimination gets overwhelmed by involuntary indoctrination.
Mar '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Nobody's Perfect: It would appear that religious schools are backed in to a corner here.
If religious schools want to discriminate against gay people, they're free to do so - they're just not free to take taxpayer dollars. Gay people pay taxes, too.
· Jan 11 at 12:32pm
It's disheartening to read here approval of the contemporary stateist's favorite means of coercion.
Edited on January 12, 2012 at 12:01amRe: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
The Department of Education has an Office of Civil Rights that investigates complaints about schools that are alleged not to have complied with anti-discrimination/harassment legislation as it pertains to students.
An OCR investigation can take many months and hundreds of man hours of documentation to complete.
Schools have to show that they have all the rules posted and have a process in place to report violations etc. Usually there will be a "Coordinator" who is supposed to oversee these things.
Apr '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
If he who pays the piper calls the tune we would all be dancing to the so-called 1 percent's jig, and would probably be better off for it. It is more likely the "squeaky wheel gets the grease" and no one squeaks longer or louder than the left-wing victimhood industry.
Jan '11
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
Nobody's Perfect: "He who pays the piper calls the tune" ... isn't exactly the sum total of political theory, is it?
I'll stick with Hillsdale on this one. It would be interesting to hear from Paul Rahe.
Well, we could say that about any topic, couldn't we?
In the meantime, I just want to preserve this in memory, so that the next time that Joe Biden tells us that we all have to pay taxes because it's patriotic ... come on! ... we'll remember that the government will only spend the money on the people and groups they find politically correct.
Are we spreading the wealth to the poor, or to the politically aligned?
(Hint: I know what the Obama Gang's answer is ...)
Re: Morals Legislation and the Tabor Case
What's meant by federal funding? Does it include, say, a voucher given to a student to spend as he sees fit on his education?