Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Campus Ministry With A Christians-Only Leadership Policy? That’s Discriminatory!
Should a Republican be allowed to sue if he can’t be chosen to lead the local Democratic Party? If you answered “yes,” then perhaps you can explain the logic behind the California State University decision that that InterVarsity — a national Christian campus ministry — can’t require the leaders of its campus Christian clubs be Christian:
California State University has told the campus ministry that “no exemption can be made” to a new non-discrimination policy that requires leadership positions be open to all students, InterVarsity announced in a monthly prayer letter. Now 23 student chapters are no longer recognized by their universities as official student groups, losing free access to rooms for meetings and student activities fairs for recruiting…
“This could be the tipping point of other university systems moving in this direction, so that’s why we are concerned,” InterVarsity president Alec Hill told CT earlier this summer. While only a handful of universities have enacted such policies, Cal State’s 450,000 students on 23 campuses could tip the scales “in the sense of public policy and other university systems moving in this direction,” he said.
Crazy stuff, huh? InterVarsity has always welcomed non-Christians to events, but they are considered bigots for requiring the leadership to agree with the core beliefs of the organization. Interesting that many other campus organizations (including Jewish, Muslim and other Christian organizations) signed nondiscrimination agreements. I suppose they assume that no one opposed to their core values will seek leadership in their organizations.
The good news is that IV isn’t giving up, and is working on a new strategy of partnering with churches near campus.
Image Credit: Shutterstock user jovan vitanovski.
The links can’t be clicked on in the OP so I copied and pasted them here for convenience.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2014/september-web-only/will-intervarsity-losing-cal-state-standoff-be-tipping-poin.html
http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/september/intervarsity-will-reinvent-student-ministry-california-stat.html
10 cents – Thanks.
But there is no “war on Christians” right?
Pretty soon, the POTUS won’t have to be American.
Eustace,
You have struck the total hypocrisy of the left. Freedom is for everyone except the religious. Unless of course you are Muslim, then you can organize child rape, plot terrorist attacks, raise money for foreign jihadist terror groups and recruit for them.
The 1st amendment to the constitution has two clauses. Establishment protects us from a state religion. Exercise is to protect us from a state secular ideology. Establishment has been over used for 100 years by the left wing to damage our social fabric. It is time to push back massively and demand that exactly the absurdity that your post is about stop in this country. This demand that a christian organization not be christian goes to the heart of the Exercise clause. It is an obviously unconstitutional attempt to prevent the free exercise of religious faith by an ideological secular government.
This must change.
Regards,
Jim
Nothing makes sense anymore.
The InterVarsity group should all join the LGBT club and try to elect some of the leadership. Then we’ll see how serious the University is about the non discrimination policy.
Some people don’t know the difference between discrimination and a distinction.
I still wish someone would try fighting fire with fire by singling out some earnest, kooky left-wing groupwith a small membership–Carbon Tax Lesbians would be perfect–and organizing a couple dozen volunteers to join suddenly and elect a loud-mouthed right-winger as president. That’ll learn ’em.
Time for a lawsuit.
Why is this not covered by freedom of association? Why is the state involved in telling a private group how it can set up its own organizational structure?
Whiskey Sam
Why is this not covered by freedom of association? Why is the state involved in telling a private group how it can set up its own organizational structure?
The reason the school system believes it has a voice was because InterVarsity had in the past been allowed to use resources of the school system. They met on campus (in classrooms and lecture halls.) They participated in school events (such as setting up information tables at Freshmen orientation.) There were some IV clubs that availed themselves to funds the school made available to clubs. One could argue that the school supporting religious clubs is a violation of the spirit of the 1st amendment. But they way the school system policy has changed, certainly smacks of discrimination against Christians.
This should come as no surprise. From public elementary schools to high schools self-esteem is built upon entitlement rather than academic achievement. I’m special because I exist. In many cases, not in all mind you children are taught by individuals that have no critical thinking skills. It is rather ironic that public school teachers complain that testing only measures rote learning skills yet they teach popular cultural beliefs by constant repetition. Individuals that challenge popular culture are loathed and feared by state university and college professors because they themselves cannot construct or defeat a logical argument. There is a quote attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas that states: “Few men are swayed by a logical argument, far fewer men can construct a logical argument.”
This is directed at the religious for being religious. At some point this kind of harassment designed to drive religious faith out of modern life must be stopped. The argument must be what minimum freedoms should religious organizations have in order to guarantee the right of the free exercise of religious observance. This level of government intrusiveness would destroy all organized religion. The complete secularization of society would be the result.
The public school system has no right to be a ‘religion free zone’. That is an extreme interpretation of Establishment. It is time to push back with Exercise. If the religious are made to feel totally uncomfortable in public schools this is a serious breach of their freedom and rights.
Regards,
Jim
Then Christian students should have that portion of their student fees returned to them that support LBGT or non-Christian groups. I find it difficult to understand how taxes collected at the point of a gun from Christians that pay for state universities, as well as student fees collected from Christian students that pay for campus facilities and campus events that they cannot use or participate in yet non-Christian groups may use campus facilities and events that Christians have helped to subsidize through their unreturned fees is not unlike a dhimma tax.
This happened at Vanderbilt with a christian group that had official association status. They told them that they couldn’t require members to be devout Christians. Guess what started it all? Yep. An open, practicing homosexual student demanded membership. Vandy sent them an Orwellian letter saying “Of course we’re not restricting your freedom of religion when we restrict your freedom of religion”. When the state legislature threatened to withhold funding (Vandy gets some despite being a private school), the University wouldn’t move an inch, and threatened to close down its trauma center in the hospital, the only level one trauma center in the area. The state backed down. The anti-Christian policy remains in place. I hope they never win another football game again.
I’m at Vanderbilt, and just returned this evening from meeting with a group of Lutheran students (one of the groups that had its status as an authorized student organization removed). It’s been a trying time, because they can’t use authorized channels to get the word out about meetings or activities (and yes, they still do meet on campus; the difference now is that they’re officially invisible). Still, the students remain upbeat, and I think perhaps feel somewhat akin to the early Christians, sheltering in the catacombs against Roman persecution. Although its not what they would want, God can use even trials like these to strengthen faith.
From what I understand the CSU system is finally getting around to enforcing its non-discrimination policy, which reads: “No campus shall recognize any…student organization that discriminates on the basis of race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, color, age, gender, marital status, citizenship, sexual orientation, or disability.” Interesting that it doesn’t say “creed.” Is there anything to this omission? So, a religious group cannot discriminate on the basis of religion. But a political group can discriminate on the basis of political belief, because it’s not a religion, right? And the vegan club can discriminate against carnivores because that’s not a religion either? I’m so curious. Does anyone know the answer to this?