Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
Thought I would point out /Schneider v. Smith/, 390 U.S. 17 (1968), where the Court determined that an individual's ability to serve on a merchant vessel could not be limited on the basis of past associations: We are loath to conclude that Congress, in its grant of authority to the President to `safeguard' vessels and waterfront facilities from `sabotage or other subversive acts,' undertook to reach into the First Amendment area. The provision of the Act in question, 50 USC Sec. 191(b), speaks only in terms of actions, not ideas or beliefs or reading habits or social, educational, or political associations. The purpose of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, unlike more recent models promoting a welfare state, was to take government off the backs of people. The First Amendment's ban against Congress `abridging' freedom of speech, the right peaceably to assemble and to petition, and the `associational freedom' (/Sheldon v. Tucker,/ [364 US 479] at 490 that goes with those rights create a preserve where the views of the individual are made inviolate. This is the philosophy of Jefferson that `[t]he opinions of men are not the object of civil government, nor under its jurisdiction [I]t is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order ...' On 7/29/2010 3:34 PM, Lisa A. Runquist wrote: The right to believe is absolute. The right to act on that belief is not. Obviously if the adult mail initiated minors of either sex into sexual conduct, that person is committing a crime and, IMHO, should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law (and said conduct would probably result in disbarment). But belief without corresponding criminal or tortious action does not seem to me to be an offense that is actionable or should limit the person's right to pursue his or her chosen profession. Lisa On 7/29/2010 3:08 PM, Steven Jamar wrote: What are the limits on state considering moral fitness or analogues for licensing public-service professions? Could a state lawfully refuse to license a lawyer who was a holocaust denier? Who believed that the proper role for adult males was to initiate minor males into sexual conduct through homosexual actions? What, if any, would be the limits? Or are there none? -- Lisa A. Runquist Runquist Associates Attorneys at Law 17554 Community Street Northridge, CA 91325 (818)609-7761 (818)609-7794 (fax) l...@runquist.com http://www.runquist.com ___ 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.
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
On 7/28/2010 3:23 PM, Lisa A. Runquist wrote: If the person completed all of the requirements to obtain a degree, the degree should be granted, regardless of their religious beliefs. That would include allowing someone to graduate from medical school, even if they do not believe in blood transfusions or abortions. And they should be able to obtain a degree from the counselor education program if, as appears to be the case in this situation, both the academic showing and the clinical performance are adequate. The question of obtaining licensing is a second matter, although again, if the person is otherwise qualified, that person should be granted a license -- e.g. if the person passes the bar exam, is of good moral character, etc., then he or she should be able to become a lawyer, regardless of his or her religious beliefs. Then comes the bottom line question which is being incorrectly posed as the answer to the first: Can and should that person be hired for a particular position? But this is a third and totally separate question. Clearly if the person is unable to perform the functions of the job, he or she should not be hired. And if the person insists on interjecting religion into a non-religious workplace, they probably would be fired from most jobs (for good cause). But that does not mean the person would not be a good counselor in other situations. Many religious organizations provide counselors for their constituents; these people want counseling from someone with strong moral standards rather than from someone who has no moral standards at all, or standards that are far different from theirs. Why should we deny them the ability to hire counselors with similar religious beliefs, by refusing to allow said person(s) to graduate, and/or to be licensed? This clearly does not mean everyone will want to or should use that counselor, just as not everyone will want a counselor who is unwilling to hold fast to his or her beliefs. Lisa On 7/28/2010 2:50 PM, Paul Finkelman wrote: I am not suggesting Christians can't go to medical school just that they cannot impose their religious doctrines on their patients and they should not be graduated if they will not do that. Again, Will, are you going to graduate med students who insist on being surgeons but will not use blood transfusion? This issue is not one of belief, nor is it one of practice. It is one of separating the workplace from what you believe outside the workplace. If you cannot make that separation, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that you cannot take a certain job. Would you recruit and train a pacifist Christian for the police department who says I will NEVER carry a gun? How about an EMT, Firefighter, or police officer who will not enter someone else's church or a cemetery on religious grounds? --- On *Wed, 7/28/10, Will Esser /willes...@yahoo.com/* wrote: From: Will Esser willes...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 9:18 AM It strikes me that Paul's comments tie in well with the recent discussion about the Fifth Circuit's Arocha decision overturning the school district ban on wearing long hair. As I recall in those discussions, Doug Laycock raised the legitimate question about whether a ban on wearing long hair could cause religious groups to chose not to move to certain regions of the country (i.e. geographical de-selection of religious groups due to government regulation). Similarly, in this case, the question strikes me as whether the therapy program is being set up in such a manner that it de-selects certain religious groups (i.e. Christians, in this example). Paul talks about the standards of the profession. While, I have no doubt there is significant disagreement over what the standards of the profession are, it seems to me that if the government (through a university) is involved in saying what the standards are in such a way that Christians are automatically de-selected from the program (i.e. you cannot be a faithful, believing Christian AND a therapist), that is a problem. Taking Paul's example of the medical school a step further, could a public medical school set up its program such that students were not allowed to graduate unless they had participated in (or performed) an abortion? Will P.S. As a quick aside, Paul, I think Christian ethical convictions of do unto others requires respect for /people/ as children of God but does not therefore necessarily require acceptance or respect of people's /values/. Christian ethical convictions are based in a belief in objective truth, such that do unto others requires a desire
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
Many people do indeed pray to God on Sunday and prey on people on Monday. But many people believe in not separating their lives in that way. So, no. The refusal or inability to separate one's values from work should not bar someone from a job. Inability to do the job should. If one is unable to authorize a medical treatment or to do a medical treatment that is the proper medical treatment for a particular condition, that person should not practice medicine, unless we have collectively deemed that we will make an exception, e.g., conscience clauses permitting doctors and hospitals to refuse to perform abortions. Conscience clauses are more than a little problematic practically and legally in some instances, but they can work well enough. The harder question is whether there is a constitutional right to a conscience-based exception to meeting the practice norms. If there is not, then the school can refuse to grant the degree to the student who cannot conform her conduct to the legitimate secular norms. But the school cannot discriminate on the basis of beliefs alone. On 7/28/2010 2:50 PM, Paul Finkelman wrote: I am not suggesting Christians can't go to medical school just that they cannot impose their religious doctrines on their patients and they should not be graduated if they will not do that. Again, Will, are you going to graduate med students who insist on being surgeons but will not use blood transfusion? This issue is not one of belief, nor is it one of practice. It is one of separating the workplace from what you believe outside the workplace. If you cannot make that separation, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that you cannot take a certain job. -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice http://iipsj.org Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 http://iipsj.com/SDJ/ To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour. William Blake ___ 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.
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
This subtext of this discussion (which I think applies to the refusing pharmacist and religious landlord cases as well, I think) challenges our common understanding about the meaning of public accommodation. Should it be the pre-Civil War definition, which centered around arbitrary refusals to extend a narrow range of necessary services, i.e., carriages, rooms, etc to individuals, not tied to a particular status? Should it be tied to some specific status discrimination (whatever the status list might be, more or less expansive) and specific types of public goods/services as the Civil War amendments and later legislation did? Or have we come to understand the concept of public accommodation to mean that any professional or commercial service or merchandise that is not offered to an intimate exclusive group (a la the Roberts v. Jaycees paradigm) must be offered to all demanding customers on the terms that either they or an outside licensing body dictate? My initial reaction is that it makes some sense to go for the middle ground--e.g., to use some set of status discrimination criteria as the defining line between permissible and non-permissible exclusion of patients, customers, etc. and perhaps for contested statuses (like welfare receipt, veteran's status, etc.) some notion of necessary service that accommodates modern life, realizing that this would still be subject to a lot of debates. Assuming no such prohibited discrimination, if the provider announces his/her exclusions in some public way (to avoid maltreatment, permit patient choice of provider, etc), is not a monopoly, and treats the patients/clients he/she does accept according to professional standards (which in this case may include patient self-determination), why shouldn't he or she be able to make patient/client choices based on conscientiously held beliefs, religious or otherwise? Academics make exclusionary decisions all of the time, both about the students we will admit, and what we are willing to teach them. Same with lawyers, subject to the ethical duty to make sure that clients don't go completely unrepresented because of inability to pay or unpopularity of cause. (We don't, of course, exclude on the basis of prohibited statuses and even some non-prohibited statuses.) Since we law professors do not generally accommodate customer demands for service, no matter what, I don't know why we should have a free pass if we are not willing to extend some choice to other professionals. Marie A. Failinger Professor of Law Editor, Journal of Law and Religion Hamline University School of Law 1536 Hewitt Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55104 U.S.A. 651-523-2124 (work phone) 651-523-2236 (work fax) mfailin...@hamline.edu (email) Steven Jamar stevenja...@gmail.com 7/29/2010 11:01 AM Many people do indeed pray to God on Sunday and prey on people on Monday. But many people believe in not separating their lives in that way. So, no. The refusal or inability to separate one's values from work should not bar someone from a job. Inability to do the job should. If one is unable to authorize a medical treatment or to do a medical treatment that is the proper medical treatment for a particular condition, that person should not practice medicine, unless we have collectively deemed that we will make an exception, e.g., conscience clauses permitting doctors and hospitals to refuse to perform abortions. Conscience clauses are more than a little problematic practically and legally in some instances, but they can work well enough. The harder question is whether there is a constitutional right to a conscience-based exception to meeting the practice norms. If there is not, then the school can refuse to grant the degree to the student who cannot conform her conduct to the legitimate secular norms. But the school cannot discriminate on the basis of beliefs alone. On 7/28/2010 2:50 PM, Paul Finkelman wrote: I am not suggesting Christians can't go to medical school just that they cannot impose their religious doctrines on their patients and they should not be graduated if they will not do that. Again, Will, are you going to graduate med students who insist on being surgeons but will not use blood transfusion? This issue is not one of belief, nor is it one of practice. It is one of separating the workplace from what you believe outside the workplace. If you cannot make that separation, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that you cannot take a certain job. -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice http://iipsj.org Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 http://iipsj.com/SDJ/ To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour. William Blake
RE: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
I think Lisa Runquist draws an important distinction that clarifies the issue and its resolution. Excluding someone from professional education suggests that their beliefs, or more precisely the influence of their beliefs on their behavior, prevents them from providing competent professional services in almost any circumstance. The religious beliefs at issue in some cases may disqualify a person from being hired for certain counseling positions – but there may be other opportunities for which their beliefs do not pose a barrier to the successful performance of their duties. Dismissal from professional school seems premature and unjustified in such circumstances. In the counseling context, I might offer two tentative caveats (tentative because I have so little expertise relating to this profession). First, it may be that being a successful counselor requires the practitioner to be able to distance themselves from the beliefs of the client at least to some extent. If that is the case (and I emphasize “if” here), then there may be reason to dismiss a student who is completely incapable of separating her own views from the needs of her client. There may be quasi-counseling jobs that person may fulfill, but she cannot be certified as counselor under professional standards. The second caveat is that the student must be willing to abide by accepted clinical requirements – which may require the temporary subordination of her beliefs to avoid harm to the client. The situations described in these cases presume that an openly gay or lesbian client seeks counseling and the counselor chooses to refer that client to another counselor because her religious beliefs would interfere with the provision of counseling services to that individual. In situations where such referrals are easily arranged, that seems like a win-win decision. The counselor and client will be better off if the client sees a different counselor. In some cases, however, the client’s homosexuality (or other personal characteristic that the counselor cannot affirm because of her religious beliefs) may not be disclosed until several counseling sessions have been completed. It may be that in such a circumstance, it is still desirable for the client to transition to a different counselor. But clinical requirements designed to protect the client may preclude any abrupt transfer of responsibilities. If a student indicated that even in such situations, she would not be able to subordinate her beliefs even temporarily in order to protect the mental health of her client – the professional school may have reason to dismiss the student from its program. Alan Brownstein From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Lisa A. Runquist Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:41 AM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views On 7/28/2010 3:23 PM, Lisa A. Runquist wrote: If the person completed all of the requirements to obtain a degree, the degree should be granted, regardless of their religious beliefs. That would include allowing someone to graduate from medical school, even if they do not believe in blood transfusions or abortions. And they should be able to obtain a degree from the counselor education program if, as appears to be the case in this situation, both the academic showing and the clinical performance are adequate. The question of obtaining licensing is a second matter, although again, if the person is otherwise qualified, that person should be granted a license -- e.g. if the person passes the bar exam, is of good moral character, etc., then he or she should be able to become a lawyer, regardless of his or her religious beliefs. Then comes the bottom line question which is being incorrectly posed as the answer to the first: Can and should that person be hired for a particular position? But this is a third and totally separate question. Clearly if the person is unable to perform the functions of the job, he or she should not be hired. And if the person insists on interjecting religion into a non-religious workplace, they probably would be fired from most jobs (for good cause). But that does not mean the person would not be a good counselor in other situations. Many religious organizations provide counselors for their constituents; these people want counseling from someone with strong moral standards rather than from someone who has no moral standards at all, or standards that are far different from theirs. Why should we deny them the ability to hire counselors with similar religious beliefs, by refusing to allow said person(s) to graduate, and/or to be licensed? This clearly does not mean everyone will want to or should use that counselor, just as not everyone will want a counselor who is unwilling to hold fast
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
Alan - Are not your caveats are satisfied by the fact that her clinical performance was apparently satisfactory? BTW, there have been clients that I, as an attorney, have declined to represent, as it has been obvious to me that, because their goals were so diametrically opposed to mine, I would not be able to adequately represent them (such as people who want to spay and neuter all dogs, and ultimately do away with all pet ownership). I rarely have that problem with religious organizations, however, as long as they are sincere in their beliefs. Lisa On 7/29/2010 11:02 AM, Brownstein, Alan wrote: I think Lisa Runquist draws an important distinction that clarifies the issue and its resolution. Excluding someone from professional education suggests that their beliefs, or more precisely the influence of their beliefs on their behavior, prevents them from providing competent professional services in almost any circumstance. The religious beliefs at issue in some cases may disqualify a person from being hired for certain counseling positions – but there may be other opportunities for which their beliefs do not pose a barrier to the successful performance of their duties. Dismissal from professional school seems premature and unjustified in such circumstances. In the counseling context, I might offer two tentative caveats (tentative because I have so little expertise relating to this profession). First, it may be that being a successful counselor requires the practitioner to be able to distance themselves from the beliefs of the client at least to some extent. If that is the case (and I emphasize “if” here), then there may be reason to dismiss a student who is completely incapable of separating her own views from the needs of her client. There may be quasi-counseling jobs that person may fulfill, but she cannot be certified as counselor under professional standards. The second caveat is that the student must be willing to abide by accepted clinical requirements – which may require the temporary subordination of her beliefs to avoid harm to the client. The situations described in these cases presume that an openly gay or lesbian client seeks counseling and the counselor chooses to refer that client to another counselor because her religious beliefs would interfere with the provision of counseling services to that individual. In situations where such referrals are easily arranged, that seems like a win-win decision. The counselor and client will be better off if the client sees a different counselor. In some cases, however, the client’s homosexuality (or other personal characteristic that the counselor cannot affirm because of her religious beliefs) may not be disclosed until several counseling sessions have been completed. It may be that in such a circumstance, it is still desirable for the client to transition to a different counselor. But clinical requirements designed to protect the client may preclude any abrupt transfer of responsibilities. If a student indicated that even in such situations, she would not be able to subordinate her beliefs even temporarily in order to protect the mental health of her client – the professional school may have reason to dismiss the student from its program. Alan Brownstein *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Lisa A. Runquist *Sent:* Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:41 AM *To:* religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu *Subject:* Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views On 7/28/2010 3:23 PM, Lisa A. Runquist wrote: If the person completed all of the requirements to obtain a degree, the degree should be granted, regardless of their religious beliefs. That would include allowing someone to graduate from medical school, even if they do not believe in blood transfusions or abortions. And they should be able to obtain a degree from the counselor education program if, as appears to be the case in this situation, both the academic showing and the clinical performance are adequate. The question of obtaining licensing is a second matter, although again, if the person is otherwise qualified, that person should be granted a license -- e.g. if the person passes the bar exam, is of good moral character, etc., then he or she should be able to become a lawyer, regardless of his or her religious beliefs. Then comes the bottom line question which is being incorrectly posed as the answer to the first: Can and should that person be hired for a particular position? But this is a third and totally separate question. Clearly if the person is unable to perform the functions of the job, he or she should not be hired. And if the person insists on interjecting religion into a non-religious workplace, they probably would be fired from most jobs (for good cause). But that does
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
As an athiest attorney, some of my most interesting clients were evangelical, fundamentalist, born again Christians (their description of themselves). They prayed for who should be their attorney and according to them, I was the chosen one. The story is in fact a bit more involved than that, but one need not share values to represent and argue on behalf of clients vigorously. The ACLU argues on behalf of people with whom it disagrees regularly. Imputing client beliefs to their lawyers is pretty risky business. Same is true for most if not all professions. What are the limits on state considering moral fitness or analogues for licensing public-service professions? Could a state lawfully refuse to license a lawyer who was a holocaust denier? Who believed that the proper role for adult males was to initiate minor males into sexual conduct through homosexual actions? What, if any, would be the limits? Or are there none? Steve On Jul 29, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Lisa A. Runquist wrote: Alan - Are not your caveats are satisfied by the fact that her clinical performance was apparently satisfactory? BTW, there have been clients that I, as an attorney, have declined to represent, as it has been obvious to me that, because their goals were so diametrically opposed to mine, I would not be able to adequately represent them (such as people who want to spay and neuter all dogs, and ultimately do away with all pet ownership). I rarely have that problem with religious organizations, however, as long as they are sincere in their beliefs. Lisa -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice http://iipsj.org Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 http://iipsj.com/SDJ/ Enduring high school is not the same as growing up Jewish in Prague or fighting in the French Resistance. I had no solid basis for being cool in that existential motorcycle James Dean absurdist chain-smoking hero sort of way, so I gave up being cool and settled for being pleasant. Garrison Keillor ___ 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.
RE: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
I intended my caveats to be general suggestions, not as concerns that might necessarily apply to the Augusta State student in this case. The fact that her clinical performance was satisfactory would certainly be strong evidence that the first caveat was satisfied. The second caveat is less clear. A situation implicating it may not have arisen in her clinical work to date. Alan From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Lisa A. Runquist Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 2:09 PM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views Alan - Are not your caveats are satisfied by the fact that her clinical performance was apparently satisfactory? BTW, there have been clients that I, as an attorney, have declined to represent, as it has been obvious to me that, because their goals were so diametrically opposed to mine, I would not be able to adequately represent them (such as people who want to spay and neuter all dogs, and ultimately do away with all pet ownership). I rarely have that problem with religious organizations, however, as long as they are sincere in their beliefs. Lisa ___ 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.
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
Ah - but Mr. Hale had repeatedly violated the law (including a conviction for criminal trespass, resisting arrest, aggravated battery and carrying a concealed weapon) before applying for a license to practice law. Again,I would argue that it was not his beliefs, but his actions, that caused a question as to his moral character and fitness. Lisa On 7/29/2010 4:15 PM, Steven Jamar wrote: but see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_F._Hale On Jul 29, 2010, at 6:34 PM, Lisa A. Runquist wrote: The right to believe is absolute. The right to act on that belief is not. -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice http://iipsj.org Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 http://iipsj.com/SDJ/ There are obviously two educations. One should teach us how to make a living and the other how to live. James Truslow Adams -- Lisa A. Runquist Runquist Associates Attorneys at Law 17554 Community Street Northridge, CA 91325 (818)609-7761 (818)609-7794 (fax) l...@runquist.com http://www.runquist.com ___ 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.
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
It strikes me that Paul's comments tie in well with the recent discussion about
the Fifth Circuit's Arocha decision overturning the school district ban on
wearing long hair. As I recall in those discussions, Doug Laycock raised the
legitimate question about whether a ban on wearing long hair could cause
religious groups to chose not to move to certain regions of the country (i.e.
geographical de-selection of religious groups due to government regulation).
Similarly, in this case, the question strikes me as whether the therapy program
is being set up in such a manner that it de-selects certain religious groups
(i.e. Christians, in this example). Paul talks about the standards of the
profession. While, I have no doubt there is significant disagreement over
what the standards of the profession are, it seems to me that if the
government (through a university) is involved in saying what the standards
are in such a way that Christians are automatically de-selected from the
program (i.e. you cannot be a faithful, believing Christian AND a therapist),
that is a problem.
Taking Paul's example of the medical school a step further, could a public
medical school set up its program such that students were not allowed to
graduate unless they had participated in (or performed) an abortion?
Will
P.S. As a quick aside, Paul, I think Christian ethical convictions of do
unto others requires respect for people as children of God but does not
therefore necessarily require acceptance or respect of people's values.
Christian ethical convictions are based in a belief in objective truth, such
that do unto others requires a desire to know, understand and lead others to
the truth. I would argue that an attitude of I'll respect what you believe,
and you respect what I believe without an emphasis on seeking truth, is very
much divorced from Christian ethical convictions.
Will Esser --- Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Charlotte, North Carolina
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark;
the real tragedy is when men are afraid of the light.
Plato (428-345 B.C.)
--- On Wed, 7/28/10, Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.com wrote:
From: Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that
she undergo remediation due to her religious views
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 1:01 AM
_filtered #yiv381336577 {margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
#yiv381336577 P.yiv381336577MsoNormal {
MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:Times New Roman;FONT-SIZE:12pt;}
#yiv381336577 LI.yiv381336577MsoNormal {
MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:Times New Roman;FONT-SIZE:12pt;}
#yiv381336577 DIV.yiv381336577MsoNormal {
MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:Times New Roman;FONT-SIZE:12pt;}
#yiv381336577 A:link {
COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv381336577 SPAN.yiv381336577MsoHyperlink {
COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv381336577 A:visited {
COLOR:purple;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv381336577 SPAN.yiv381336577MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR:purple;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv381336577 SPAN.yiv381336577EmailStyle17 {
FONT-FAMILY:Arial;COLOR:windowtext;}
#yiv381336577 DIV.yiv381336577Section1 {
}
#yiv381336577 P {
MARGIN-TOP:0px;MARGIN-BOTTOM:0px;}
#yiv381336577 {
}
#yiv381336577 SPAN#yiv381336577misspelled {
PADDING-BOTTOM:1px;BACKGROUND:repeat-x 50% bottom;}
It would seem to me that Christian ethical convictoins would require her to
do unto others as she would want them to do unto her, and thus perhaps
respect their values and act as a responsible therapist.
I wonder, suppose she did not believe in blood transfusion and was in a medical
school? Would it be legitimate not to give her a degree because she was not
willing to apply techniquest of modern medicine to her patients. Suppose she
lectured her patients before surgery on how wrong they were for demaning a
transfusion during surgery?
In otherwords, if she is trained to be a professional in the care field, can
she be allowed to take her degree if she refuses to accept the standards of the
profession. This is not about her beliefs -- or even her actions. No one is
asking her to participate in a same sex relationship. This seesm to me to be
about her refusal to implement the standards of her profession because she does
not like the behavior of some people.
There is also of course some equal protection issues here. I would guess she
is against heavy drinking, drug use, and non-marital sex. If she insisting on
implementing her religious values when treating patients who might behave in
those ways? What about people who don't obey the sabbath (or at least her
sabbath)? Or those who don't accept the teachings of Christianity? How far,
in other words, does this go, or is she only dragging out her religious values
when dealing with gay
RE: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
Perhaps there are facts not reported in the article, but it's not clear to me how she has refused to implement the standards of her profession unless the standards of the profession require her not to believe what she does about homosexuality or, if she does, never to express those beliefs. Perhaps the standard is the idea that she not express her personal views about the morality of a client's behavior while counseling the client. Putting aside whether that really is - or ought to be - a standard of the counseling profession, there is nothing in the report suggesting that she would do so. Based on the brief filed in support of her motion for a preliminary injunctionhttp://adfwebadmin.com/resources/Files/Jennifer%20Keeton_%20Preliminary%20Injunction%20Brief.pdf, the student has said that she understands the difference between personal beliefs and how a counseling situation should be handled and the need to reflect clients’ goals and to allow them to work toward their own solutions ... She says that she would not impose her views on her clients, although she also says that if she is asked to affirm conduct that she believes to be immoral (mentioning homosexuality and the decision to have an abortion), she would not. In fact, the standard that she is said to be violating is her subjective belief that her moral views are true. She was apparently told that it is unethical for her to be not truly accepting that others can have different beliefs and values that are equally valid as your own and for her to think certain people should act in accordance with your moral values, and/or that your beliefs are in some way superior to those of others. (emphasis in original) It seems quite clear from the materials cited in the brief that her continuation in the program required her to change her beliefs. A public university seems to be taking the position that a student must sincerely embrace a form of moral relativism in order to remain in a graduate program. From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Paul Finkelman [paul.finkel...@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 12:01 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views It would seem to me that Christian ethical convictoins would require her to do unto others as she would want them to do unto her, and thus perhaps respect their values and act as a responsible therapist. I wonder, suppose she did not believe in blood transfusion and was in a medical school? Would it be legitimate not to give her a degree because she was not willing to apply techniquest of modern medicine to her patients. Suppose she lectured her patients before surgery on how wrong they were for demaning a transfusion during surgery? In otherwords, if she is trained to be a professional in the care field, can she be allowed to take her degree if she refuses to accept the standards of the profession. This is not about her beliefs -- or even her actions. No one is asking her to participate in a same sex relationship. This seesm to me to be about her refusal to implement the standards of her profession because she does not like the behavior of some people. There is also of course some equal protection issues here. I would guess she is against heavy drinking, drug use, and non-marital sex. If she insisting on implementing her religious values when treating patients who might behave in those ways? What about people who don't obey the sabbath (or at least her sabbath)? Or those who don't accept the teachings of Christianity? How far, in other words, does this go, or is she only dragging out her religious values when dealing with gay people? Paul Finkelman President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law Albany Law School 80 New Scotland Avenue Albany, NY 12208 518-445-3386 (p) 518-445-3363 (f) paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu www.paulfinkelman.com --- On Wed, 7/28/10, Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net wrote: From: Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net Subject: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 12:45 AM Jennifer Keeton is a student at Augusta State University , pursuing a graduate degree in counseling. In line with her religious beliefs, she holds to the traditional view regarding homosexuality. She has expressed those views in classroom discussions as well as in written assignment. In response, the University has informed her that she must complete a remediation program or else she will be expelled from the program. According to the complaint, the “faculty have promised to expel Miss Keeton from the graduate Counselor Education Program not because of poor academic showing or demonstrated
RE: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
If the student is committed to fulfilling her professional responsibilities, notwithstanding her religious beliefs, as Richard Esenberg suggests, I would think the university's position is hard to defend. There may be some beliefs that are so intrinsically in conflict with the competent performance of one's professional responsibilities that they disqualify a person from being certified to serve in that profession. But that is a heavy burden for a professional school to satisfy. Would the belief that a particular religion is the one true faith, and that adherents of other faiths are misguided in their beliefs and practices, disqualify students from becoming lawyers, doctors, therapists or law professors? What about the belief that all religions are false and that the adherents of all faiths hold irrational beliefs that distort their lives? Alan Brownstein -Original Message- From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Esenberg, Richard Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 6:22 AM To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views Perhaps there are facts not reported in the article, but it's not clear to me how she has refused to implement the standards of her profession unless the standards of the profession require her not to believe what she does about homosexuality or, if she does, never to express those beliefs. Perhaps the standard is the idea that she not express her personal views about the morality of a client's behavior while counseling the client. Putting aside whether that really is - or ought to be - a standard of the counseling profession, there is nothing in the report suggesting that she would do so. Based on the brief filed in support of her motion for a preliminary injunctionhttp://adfwebadmin.com/resources/Files/Jennifer%20Keeton_%20Preliminary%20Injunction%20Brief.pdf, the student has said that she understands the difference between personal beliefs and how a counseling situation should be handled and the need to reflect clients' goals and to allow them to work toward their own solutions ... She says that she would not impose her views on her clients, although she also says that if she is asked to affirm conduct that she believes to be immoral (mentioning homosexuality and the decision to have an abortion), she would not. In fact, the standard that she is said to be violating is her subjective belief that her moral views are true. She was apparently told that it is unethical for her to be not truly accepting that others can have different beliefs and values that are equally valid as your own and for her to think certain people should act in accordance with your moral values, and/or that your beliefs are in some way superior to those of others. (emphasis in original) It seems quite clear from the materials cited in the brief that her continuation in the program required her to change her beliefs. A public university seems to be taking the position that a student must sincerely embrace a form of moral relativism in order to remain in a graduate program. ___ 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.
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
I am not suggesting Christians can't go to medical school just that they cannot
impose their religious doctrines on their patients and they should not be
graduated if they will not do that. Again, Will, are you going to graduate med
students who insist on being surgeons but will not use blood transfusion?
This issue is not one of belief, nor is it one of practice. It is one of
separating the workplace from what you believe outside the workplace. If you
cannot make that separation, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that you
cannot take a certain job.
Would you recruit and train a pacifist Christian for the police department who
says I will NEVER carry a gun? How about an EMT, Firefighter, or police
officer who will not enter someone else's church or a cemetery on religious
grounds?
Paul Finkelman
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208
518-445-3386 (p)
518-445-3363 (f)
paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu
www.paulfinkelman.com
--- On Wed, 7/28/10, Will Esser willes...@yahoo.com wrote:
From: Will Esser willes...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that
she undergo remediation due to her religious views
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 9:18 AM
It strikes me that Paul's comments tie in well with the recent discussion about
the Fifth Circuit's Arocha decision overturning the school district ban on
wearing long hair. As I recall in those discussions, Doug Laycock raised the
legitimate question about whether a ban on wearing long hair could cause
religious groups to chose not to move to certain regions of the country (i.e.
geographical de-selection of religious groups due to government regulation).
Similarly, in this case, the question strikes me as whether the therapy program
is being set up in such a manner that it de-selects certain religious groups
(i.e. Christians, in this example). Paul talks about the standards of the
profession. While, I have no doubt there is significant disagreement over
what the standards of the profession are, it seems to me that if the
government (through a university) is involved in saying what the standards
are in such a way that Christians are automatically de-selected from the
program (i.e. you cannot be a faithful, believing Christian AND a therapist),
that is a problem.
Taking Paul's example of the medical school a step further, could a public
medical school set up its program such that students were not allowed to
graduate unless they had participated in (or performed) an abortion?
Will
P.S. As a quick aside, Paul, I think Christian ethical convictions of do
unto others requires respect for people as children of God but does not
therefore necessarily require acceptance or respect of people's values.
Christian ethical convictions are based in a belief in objective truth, such
that do unto others requires a desire to know, understand and lead others to
the truth. I would argue that an attitude of I'll respect what you believe,
and you respect what I believe without an emphasis on seeking truth, is very
much divorced from Christian ethical convictions.
Will Esser --- Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Charlotte, North Carolina
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark;
the real tragedy is when men are afraid of the light.
Plato (428-345 B.C.)
--- On Wed, 7/28/10, Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.com wrote:
From: Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that
she undergo remediation due to her religious views
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 1:01 AM
#yiv592399162 filtered #yiv592399162yiv381336577 {margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in
1.25in;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577 P.yiv592399162yiv381336577MsoNormal {
MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:Times New Roman;FONT-SIZE:12pt;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577 LI.yiv592399162yiv381336577MsoNormal {
MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:Times New Roman;FONT-SIZE:12pt;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577 DIV.yiv592399162yiv381336577MsoNormal {
MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt;FONT-FAMILY:Times New Roman;FONT-SIZE:12pt;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577 A:link {
COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577
SPAN.yiv592399162yiv381336577MsoHyperlink {
COLOR:blue;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577 A:visited {
COLOR:purple;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577
SPAN.yiv592399162yiv381336577MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR:purple;TEXT-DECORATION:underline;}
#yiv592399162 #yiv592399162yiv381336577
SPAN.yiv592399162yiv381336577EmailStyle17 {
FONT-FAMILY:Arial;COLOR:windowtext
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
Dear Paul, What do you say to Will's question about requiring would-be doctors to perform (elective) abortions? Doesn't your note, below, leave open hard questions about what, in fact, is necessarily entailed in a particular job? And, so long as one's scruples are disclosed, why, exactly, should the separation you allude to be required, in the counseling context? Best, Rick Sent from my iPad On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:55 PM, Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.commailto:paul.finkel...@yahoo.com wrote: I am not suggesting Christians can't go to medical school just that they cannot impose their religious doctrines on their patients and they should not be graduated if they will not do that. Again, Will, are you going to graduate med students who insist on being surgeons but will not use blood transfusion? This issue is not one of belief, nor is it one of practice. It is one of separating the workplace from what you believe outside the workplace. If you cannot make that separation, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that you cannot take a certain job. Would you recruit and train a pacifist Christian for the police department who says I will NEVER carry a gun? How about an EMT, Firefighter, or police officer who will not enter someone else's church or a cemetery on religious grounds? Paul Finkelman President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law Albany Law School 80 New Scotland Avenue Albany, NY 12208 518-445-3386 (p) 518-445-3363 (f) mailto:paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edupaul.finkel...@albanylaw.edumailto:paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu http://www.paulfinkelman.comwww.paulfinkelman.comhttp://www.paulfinkelman.com --- On Wed, 7/28/10, Will Esser willes...@yahoo.commailto:willes...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Will Esser willes...@yahoo.commailto:willes...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 9:18 AM It strikes me that Paul's comments tie in well with the recent discussion about the Fifth Circuit's Arocha decision overturning the school district ban on wearing long hair. As I recall in those discussions, Doug Laycock raised the legitimate question about whether a ban on wearing long hair could cause religious groups to chose not to move to certain regions of the country (i.e. geographical de-selection of religious groups due to government regulation). Similarly, in this case, the question strikes me as whether the therapy program is being set up in such a manner that it de-selects certain religious groups (i.e. Christians, in this example). Paul talks about the standards of the profession. While, I have no doubt there is significant disagreement over what the standards of the profession are, it seems to me that if the government (through a university) is involved in saying what the standards are in such a way that Christians are automatically de-selected from the program (i.e. you cannot be a faithful, believing Christian AND a therapist), that is a problem. Taking Paul's example of the medical school a step further, could a public medical school set up its program such that students were not allowed to graduate unless they had participated in (or performed) an abortion? Will P.S. As a quick aside, Paul, I think Christian ethical convictions of do unto others requires respect for people as children of God but does not therefore necessarily require acceptance or respect of people's values. Christian ethical convictions are based in a belief in objective truth, such that do unto others requires a desire to know, understand and lead others to the truth. I would argue that an attitude of I'll respect what you believe, and you respect what I believe without an emphasis on seeking truth, is very much divorced from Christian ethical convictions. Will Esser --- Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam Charlotte, North Carolina We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy is when men are afraid of the light. Plato (428-345 B.C.) --- On Wed, 7/28/10, Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.commailto:paul.finkel...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.commailto:paul.finkel...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 1:01 AM It would seem to me that Christian ethical convictoins would require her to do unto others as she would want them to do unto her, and thus perhaps respect their values and act as a responsible therapist. I wonder, suppose she did not believe in blood transfusion and was in a medical
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
Perhaps the analogy should be a Jew or follower of Islam applying for a job in a pork abattoir. Such a job applicant may not insist, as a matter of religious right, that the factory be shut down, but would instead be pointed toward a different employer who does not process pork, or another line of work. Ed Darrell Dallas --- On Wed, 7/28/10, Rick Garnett rgarn...@nd.edu wrote: From: Rick Garnett rgarn...@nd.edu Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 5:06 PM Dear Paul, What do you say to Will's question about requiring would-be doctors to perform (elective) abortions? Doesn't your note, below, leave open hard questions about what, in fact, is necessarily entailed in a particular job? And, so long as one's scruples are disclosed, why, exactly, should the separation you allude to be required, in the counseling context? Best, Rick Sent from my iPad On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:55 PM, Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.com wrote: I am not suggesting Christians can't go to medical school just that they cannot impose their religious doctrines on their patients and they should not be graduated if they will not do that. Again, Will, are you going to graduate med students who insist on being surgeons but will not use blood transfusion? This issue is not one of belief, nor is it one of practice. It is one of separating the workplace from what you believe outside the workplace. If you cannot make that separation, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that you cannot take a certain job. Would you recruit and train a pacifist Christian for the police department who says I will NEVER carry a gun? How about an EMT, Firefighter, or police officer who will not enter someone else's church or a cemetery on religious grounds? Paul Finkelman President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law Albany Law School 80 New Scotland Avenue Albany, NY 12208 518-445-3386 (p) 518-445-3363 (f) paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu www.paulfinkelman.com --- On Wed, 7/28/10, Will Esser willes...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Will Esser willes...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 9:18 AM It strikes me that Paul's comments tie in well with the recent discussion about the Fifth Circuit's Arocha decision overturning the school district ban on wearing long hair. As I recall in those discussions, Doug Laycock raised the legitimate question about whether a ban on wearing long hair could cause religious groups to chose not to move to certain regions of the country (i.e. geographical de-selection of religious groups due to government regulation). Similarly, in this case, the question strikes me as whether the therapy program is being set up in such a manner that it de-selects certain religious groups (i.e. Christians, in this example). Paul talks about the standards of the profession. While, I have no doubt there is significant disagreement over what the standards of the profession are, it seems to me that if the government (through a university) is involved in saying what the standards are in such a way that Christians are automatically de-selected from the program (i.e. you cannot be a faithful, believing Christian AND a therapist), that is a problem. Taking Paul's example of the medical school a step further, could a public medical school set up its program such that students were not allowed to graduate unless they had participated in (or performed) an abortion? Will P.S. As a quick aside, Paul, I think Christian ethical convictions of do unto others requires respect for people as children of God but does not therefore necessarily require acceptance or respect of people's values. Christian ethical convictions are based in a belief in objective truth, such that do unto others requires a desire to know, understand and lead others to the truth. I would argue that an attitude of I'll respect what you believe, and you respect what I believe without an emphasis on seeking truth, is very much divorced from Christian ethical convictions. Will Esser --- Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam Charlotte, North Carolina We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy is when men are afraid of the light. Plato (428-345 B.C.) --- On Wed, 7/28/10, Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Paul Finkelman paul.finkel...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due
Re: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she undergo remediation due to her religious views
@page Section1 {margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; }
P.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
LI.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: windowtext
}
DIV.Section1 {
}
P {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
BODY {
SCROLLBAR-ARROW-COLOR: #3f52b8; SCROLLBAR-DARKSHADOW-COLOR: #fafafa;
SCROLLBAR-BASE-COLOR: #f7f7f7; SCROLLBAR-HIGHLIGHT-COLOR: #cecfce;
SCROLLBAR-TRACK-COLOR: #fffbff
}
SPAN#misspelled {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 1px; BACKGROUND:
url(8.1.393.1/themes/base/squiggly.gif) repeat-x 50% bottom
}
It would seem to me that Christian
ethical convictoins would require her to do unto others as she would want
them to do unto her, and thus perhaps respect their values and act as a
responsible therapist.
I wonder, suppose she did not believe
in blood transfusion and was in a medical school? Would it be legitimate not
to
give her a degree because she was not willing to apply techniquest of modern
medicine to her patients. Suppose she lectured her patients before surgery on
how wrong they were for demaning a transfusion during surgery?
In otherwords, if she is trained to be
a professional in the care field, can she be allowed to take her degree if she
refuses to accept the standards of the profession. This is not about her
beliefs -- or even her actions. No one is asking her to participate in a same
sex relationship. This seesm to me to be about her refusal to implement the
standards of her profession because she does not like the behavior of some
people.
There is also of course some equal protection issues here. I would
guess she is against heavy drinking, drug use, and non-marital sex. If
she insisting on implementing her religious values when treating patients who
might behave in those ways? What about people who don't obey the sabbath (or
at
least her sabbath)? Or those who don't accept the teachings of Christianity?
How far, in other words, does this go, or is she only dragging out her
religious
values when dealing with gay people?
Paul Finkelman
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208
518-445-3386 (p)
518-445-3363 (f)
paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu
www.paulfinkelman.com
--- On Wed, 7/28/10, Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net wrote:
From: Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net
Subject: Augusta State University student sues school over requirement that she
undergo remediation due to her religious views
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 12:45 AM
Jennifer Keeton is a student at
Augusta State
University , pursuing a
graduate degree in counseling. In line with her religious beliefs, she holds
to the traditional view regarding homosexuality. She has expressed those
views in classroom discussions as well as in written assignment. In
response, the University has informed her that she must complete a remediation
program or else she will be expelled from the program. According to the
complaint, the “faculty have promised to expel Miss Keeton from the graduate
Counselor Education Program not because of poor academic showing or
demonstrated deficiencies in clinical performance, but simply because she has
communicated both inside and outside the classroom that she holds to Christian
ethical convictions on matters of human sexuality and gender identity.”
From Atlanta
Journal-Constitution:
http://www.ajc.com/news/college-punished-her-for-577547.html
From Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/27/georgia-university-tells-student-lose-religion-lawsuit-claims/
-Inline Attachment Follows-
___
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.
___
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
