Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court: Christian group can't bar gays, get funding (Christian Legal Society v. Martinez)
AP ^ | 06/28/2010 | Staff

Posted on 06/28/2010 8:21:47 AM PDT by OldDeckHand

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court says a law school can legally deny recognition to a Christian student group that won't let gays join.

The court on Monday turned away an appeal from the Christian Legal Society, which sued to get funding and recognition from the University of California's Hastings College of the Law.

(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; 501c3; academicbias; celebratesin; christians; christianstudents; culturewar; downisup; firstamendment; gays; hastings; homosexualagenda; jesus; judicialactivism; liberalfascism; liberalkoolaid; moralabsolutes; sexpositiveagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-123 next last
To: Mr Rogers

LOL. Where are all these “conservatives” on these campuses? There aren’t enough to take over a phone booth.
There aren’t even enough to protect conservative speakers from the Left. They get run off of campuses from coast to coast on a regular basis.


101 posted on 06/28/2010 4:01:07 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Redcloak

Whaaa? You mean I have to put off my explosion of indignation and righteous outrage? Rats!!


102 posted on 06/28/2010 4:02:40 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

Bullseye.


103 posted on 06/28/2010 4:08:45 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

OMG you have three in college. My sympathies/congratulations. After my last was degreed, I retired.


104 posted on 06/28/2010 4:14:21 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob
"OMG you have three in college. My sympathies/congratulations. After my last was degreed, I retired."

I had five. One graduated, and the other is in graduate school, but that's being picked up by the US Navy. Of the 3 currently in, one is in NROTC, one is on athletic scholarship and the third is on partial academic scholarship. My wife was a homework Nazi, and it paid off - literally.

105 posted on 06/28/2010 4:22:01 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Good job. My wife passed 11 yrs ago but she would be happy to know our boys are well-educated and good men. Our elder son just returned from a six yr Naval enlistment wherein he was a Nuke on the USS Ohio. He is set up well now closer to home than Seattle.


106 posted on 06/28/2010 4:27:59 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob
"My wife passed 11 yrs ago but she would be happy to know our boys are well-educated and good men. "

My condolences on your loss.

I have one who's a Marine and already spent a tour in Afghanistan. Another who is already committed to the Navy and is in medical school, and a third who just completed their first year of NROTC.

I'm proud of them and their service, but as I'm sure you can appreciate, I'm happiest when they come home. People can't begin to understand how upsetting 6-12 month deployments can be.

107 posted on 06/28/2010 4:42:20 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

It is hellish. I can’t even imagine being hundreds of feet underwater for months on end.

Tell your children that there are many of us out there who respect and value their service and sacrifice.


108 posted on 06/28/2010 4:44:47 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

wonder if the muslim groups can ban homo’s, and adulterous women??? they kill both..... but then again, they are the obamantion’s people.....


109 posted on 06/28/2010 5:25:19 PM PDT by bareford101 (Be loud! We have nothing – NOTHING - to apologize for in fighting for our Country!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

wonder if the muslim groups can ban homo’s, and adulterous women??? they kill both..... but then again, they are the obamanation’s kin.... we gotta get him outta there....


110 posted on 06/28/2010 5:25:48 PM PDT by bareford101 (Be loud! We have nothing – NOTHING - to apologize for in fighting for our Country!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

The majority opinion specifically answered your question on page 29 of the PDF file in a footnote (the case reference is Board of Regents of University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth (2000)) ...

“In Southworth, university students challenged a mandatory student-activity fee used to fund student groups. Finding the political and ideological speech of certain groups offensive, the student-challengers argued that imposition of the fee violated their First Amendment rights. 529 U.S., at 221. This Court upheld the university’s choice to subsidize groups whose expression some students found distasteful, but we admonished that the university could not “prefer some viewpoints to others” in the distribution of funds. Id., at 233. We cautioned that the university’s referendum process, which allowed students to vote on whether a student organization would receive financial support, risked violation of this principle by allowing students to select groups to fund based on their viewpoints. Id., at 235. In this case, in contrast, the all-comers policy governs all RSOs; Hastings does not pick and choose which organizations must comply with he policy of the basis of viewpoint. App. 221. Southworth accordingly provides no support for the dissent’s warped analysis.”

So, in short, no. You can’t opt out of mandatory student activity fees even if you find some of the groups offensive. You can, however, sue if you aren’t subject to the same rules as everyone else.


111 posted on 06/28/2010 5:51:11 PM PDT by WallStreetCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: apillar
Strange ruling, so essentially they are saying that all groups have to be open to anybody to receive funding. So the Black Student Union couldn't turn away members of Klan. The College Republicans couldn't turn away Communists and vice versa. It seems to open the door to a lot of shenanigans, if a group opposed to a groups ideology decides to "take over" that group. Of course an easy way around it is to simply not apply for Government funding.

They are not saying that every University has to have that policy. In this case, the University claimed that that really was their policy, and the Court held that the policy was not unconstitutional if it was applied to every group and not just used against the Christian group. The case was sent back to the lower court for hearings on that issue.

112 posted on 06/28/2010 5:57:22 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Homosexuality is an abomination.In the King James Version, Leviticus 18:22 is translated: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
This is the WORD OF GOD!!


113 posted on 06/28/2010 6:04:49 PM PDT by mpeters
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WallStreetCapitalist

Thanks for this explanation.


114 posted on 06/28/2010 6:18:00 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Did you hear about the guy whose whole left side was cut off? He's all right now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

IN the NYC area, the various MSA groups deny membership to include but not limited to:
Christians
Hindus
Sikhs
Jews
Gays
Northern Caucus Muslims


115 posted on 06/28/2010 7:01:10 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Yes, that’s what I was talking about.

It seems there may have been some action on that front way back when, but I don’t recall. Perhaps it was just discussion, with nothing further done.

Thanks for clarifying.


116 posted on 06/28/2010 9:43:33 PM PDT by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander

Thats how I see it.

You can’t adjust the wind, but you can adjust your sails.


117 posted on 06/29/2010 1:02:46 AM PDT by esoxmagnum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
This case is so insidious because it leaves open a liberal opportunity for any leftist to define "funding." To a leftist, "funding" is exempting Churches from paying taxes. "Funding" means even the most tangential ways that the Boy Scouts of American interact with government (President's honorary title, etc.) "Funding" is the most incidental ways that government provides a public good. "Funding" means walking on a sidewalk that a city built and maintains.
118 posted on 06/29/2010 5:00:09 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

The obvious purpose of the leftist degenerates is not to “join” a group but to destroy it by deconstructing its basic tenets from within. Homosexuals have been doing this with various denominations for decades.


119 posted on 06/29/2010 5:03:31 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: apillar
Of course an easy way around it is to simply not apply for Government funding.

This has been Hillsdale College's core principle from the start, in order to avoid any governmental regulation and imposed value system onto their excellent conservative educational system. No student grants or subsidized loans are allowed. Still, the college was sued and forced to allow some of this government funding to seep in, destoying in some measure their right to autonomy.

Expect this for groups which shun government funding. They will be forced to submit by other means. We no longer live in a free society.

120 posted on 06/29/2010 5:12:57 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-123 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson