So that universities could give admission preferences to, say,
evangelical Christians, if they conclude that they are underrepresented among
students or on the faculty? To the more devout of all faiths, if it thinks
they are underrepresented? I think race-based admissions preferences (the
programs which are most often defended using “racial diversity” arguments) are
troublesome enough; religion-based preferences strike me as even worse.
Eugene
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Worley
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:01 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: thoughts on constitutionality of single-sex hours for public pool?
It is one thing to say religious minorities have no right to shape the law so
public facilities match their religious sentiments. It is another thing to
suggest that our constitution requires public facilities to not serve religious
minorities.
Is not encouraging religious diversity a compelling interest, under the equal
protection clause, just like encouraging racial diversity is for law schools?
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
