9th Circuit: University Can Force Christian Groups Open to Non-Christians.

Christianity Today ^ | 8/5/11 | Morgan Feddes

[DJ MacWoW]

Support The Spirit Of Conservatism

Donate To FR

Click The Warhorse To Donate

Consider Donating Monthly!

[Upbeat]

I don’t know everyone seems to be upset about this. Now I can be the Catholic Church’s first Protestant cardinal.

[flying Elvis]

Open to non-Christians and open to Trojans intent on destroying from within is quite different. No Christian group, or any other group for that matter, wiccans, Catholics, Hindus, or athiests, would allow someone who fundamentally disagreed with the organizations bedrock principals to have a meaningful say in the direction of the organization. What is happening on campuses is liberals are attempting to infiltrate or blatantly break into Christian organizations for the sole purpose of running them off campus.

[stocksthatgoup]

Cool, know I can join the black and Islamic Unions on campus.

[super7man]

I can hear the screams of intolerance when a bunch of straights take over the LGBT(whatever)Club and bring in speakers on how to get out of the Gay lifestyle.

[AndyJackson]

it seems to me that this 9th Circus ruling is about as silly and meaningless as anything else the government has coming out of California these days.

I have not read the decision and so I cannot take a side at this point, but in terms of facts you must keep in mind that it is the Christian group that brought the suit to be permitted to close its doors.

[Texas Gal]

I don’t know, it seems like it could be a good thing for a Christian to have a non-Christian wanting to hang out with him. it would be a good time and place to influence them toward Christ.

[fini]

"So whites can flood the black students’ association and Christians can join the Muslim Students’ Association and destroy them through dilution of their membership? This ruling cuts both ways."

And if those clubs are smart, they won't say a word. I am a conservative white male, but if you looked at my resume from Law school organizations that I belonged to, you would conclude that I was a liberal black female. I had a lot of fun and we all got along pretty well. Having said that, I did go to a pretty conservative law school, e.g. the president of the Environmental law forum loved fox hunting with all the bells and whistles (horses, hounds, horns, etc...). And yes, she did look pretty good in her "whites and reds."

[fwdude]

It is patently insane to force the acceptance of members to a group who are diametrically opposed to that groups core values, publicly funded or not.

And this is where the Left really gets creative; with it's contrived definition of "public." It's becoming increasingly obvious that the Left considers anything with even a tangential relationship with the government to be "public." So, walking on a sidewalk to a private club meeting can be arguably deems as "publicly funded" to the moonbats.

[fwdude]

You do get the entire point of “force” versus “allowance,” right?

[newzjunkey]

The groups are just "officially recognized" by the university. If you think they actually get any student dues you're likely mistaken.

Their "benefits" are likely limited to posting rights on campus announcing meetings/events or an ability to lease a booth during student orientation.

Students fees are sucked up by sports, primarily to cover hundreds of thousands in insurance premiums for traveling teams.

Sports neatly avoid these inclusion rules by having "try outs" and thus limiting their rosters legally. Title IX lets them escape co-ed sports by having separate-but-equal programs for men and women (but wait, that's not necessarily require now either). Where transgender players are supposed to go, I'm not sure. I digress.

This ruling means any group can be taken over by organized disruptors. A Christian group can be overrun by angry atheists and destroyed from within. In theory, a gay club could be overrun by traditional marriage proponents and so forth.

We'll see how that goes or whether this is another case of "some are more equal than others" where anything deemed dominant, male or mainstream must be inclusive to its own dilution and peril while anything deemed minority can be exclusionary to protect and strengthen its unique identity and preserve diversity.

Women fall into the second group despite being more than half the population. It's all about balancing the tyranny of the evil patriarchy of course. /s

I suggest students TEST this ruling by joining clubs they wouldn't otherwise and see if they're tossed out for disagreeing because--gasp--they're accused of creating a hostile environment threatening to a favored group.

[Politicalmom]

I believe non-Christians were trying to infiltrate the leadership positions.

[little jeremiah]

I must ping this tomorrow.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks ZGuy.

[Gene Eric]

>> So, then can Jews and Christians join Muslim organizations too?

No, you can’t do that. That’s crusading.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Well, the dime goes to the overall university environment. I don’t think anything consensual between students carried on and advertised entirely outside campus would fall under even this ruling, but who knows.