Personally Opposed to Homosexuality?... Judge OK's Expulsion from College...

Ravi, the school receives public funds, yours and my taxes. The school has violated the law in auditing the student's faith. If her attorneys can prove through internal memoranda that this student was set up to fail rather than for success, the school is going to lose in two areas, and of those is going to open them to serious damages to her. This is what happens when either the left or the right play agenda instead of the profession. What a violation of professional ethics.
I don't understand why you see it that way. She refused to do her assignment because the patient she was assigned to counsel turned out to be gay.

There is no religious freedom being trampled on here. Schools are well within their rights to insist a student complete assignments.
 
The student may be homophobic based on religion, but a school that accepts state funds cannot use her religious belief to stop her. This sounds like agenda on behalf of the school and the faculty. She's going to win on appeal.
 
I Disagree with it...

For the same Reason that Accommodations are made for People during the Draft who don't want to Fight the War... For Religious Reasons.

Colleges shouldn't be Forcing People to Validate other People's Personal Lifestyle Choices.

This Woman shouldn't be able to Deny a Homosexual College, but she shouldn't have to Entertain a Homosexual past being a Human.

The Sexuality should be Irrelevant, so why was it an Issue?

:)

peace...

Is it really a about religion? I think not.

For if it were about religion, then you'd have to concede agreement with the ruling if the woman's aversion to queers was simply her choice, and not based on religious convictions. Short of that, you'd need to concoct a contingency rationale to disagree with it.

lead1.jpg


What is that Sitting in this Beautiful Black Woman's Lap?...

:)

peace...


Irrelevent attempt at deflection. A true non-sequitur.

A sure sign that Mal has no move.

Check mate! :thup:

:lol:
 
The conservative fag-bashers don't even realize the hypocrisy of their position on this.

On the one hand, they insist that regardless of natural attraction, homosexual lifestyle, intercourse, etc. is a behavioral choice, and is therefore not worthy of discrimination protection.

And then this case comes along and they refuse to apply the same reasoning, which dictates that regardless of this woman's religious motivation, the refusal to counsel queers is a behavioral choice.

In summary:

Homosexuality = Choice = Not worthy of discrimination protection
Refusal to counsel queers = Choice = Somehow worthy of discrimination protection

That folks, is a clear cut example of hypocrisy. :thup:
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: mal
The student may be homophobic based on religion, but a school that accepts state funds cannot use her religious belief to stop her. This sounds like agenda on behalf of the school and the faculty. She's going to win on appeal.
Their "agenda" appears to graduate students that will go on to be high school counselors. What good is a high school counselor that lets her own personal prejudices dictate who she plans to counsel?
 
Ravi, I understand what you are saying, but the second the school got involved with the "why" of what she believed, it crossed the religious thresh hold. We flatly cannot have the state evaluating the "correctness" of religious belief, certainly not with our tax dollars. I despise the woman's position. I don't think it is Christian at all. However, unless we protect her in this matter, the state can come after you and me for our ethical and value systems.

The very best thing is for the school now is to settle with a sealed order: the student will no longer discuss the case, the state college will allow her to transfer her credits without prejudice to a private school counseling program that will accept her, and the state will pay her tuition.
 
Ravi, I understand what you are saying, but the second the school got involved with the "why" of what she believed, it crossed the religious thresh hold. We flatly cannot have the state evaluating the "correctness" of religious belief, certainly not with our tax dollars. I despise the woman's position. I don't think it is Christian at all. However, unless we protect her in this matter, the state can come after you and me for our ethical and value systems.

The very best thing is for the school now is to settle with a sealed order: the student will no longer discuss the case, the state college will allow her to transfer her credits without prejudice to a private school counseling program that will accept her, and the state will pay her tuition.




That's the thing. She was did not fail because she is Christian. She failed based on her actions which according to her were motivated by her religious beliefs.

As a student in this counseling program she was required to reconcile her own beliefs with being able to counsel any and all potential clients. No one was forcing her to embrace homosexuality or change her religious beliefs...The program had a requirement that this individual Christian woman was unable to meet...A requirement which other Christians in this program HAVE successfully met.


U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh dismissed Ward’s lawsuit against Eastern Michigan University. She was removed from the school’s counseling program last year because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.


The university contended she violated school policy and the American Counseling Association code of ethics.


...

Eastern Michigan University hailed the decision.

“We are pleased that the court has upheld our position in this matter,” EMU spokesman Walter Kraft said in a written statement. “Julea Ward was not discriminated against because of her religion. To the contrary, Eastern Michigan is deeply committed to the education of our students and welcomes individuals from diverse backgrounds into our community

In his 48-page opinion, Judge Steeh said the university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics.

“Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values,” he wrote in a portion of his ruling posted by The Detroit News. “In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.”

FOXNews.com - Court Upholds Expulsion of Counseling Student Who Opposes Homosexuality
 
Ravi, I understand what you are saying, but the second the school got involved with the "why" of what she believed, it crossed the religious thresh hold. We flatly cannot have the state evaluating the "correctness" of religious belief, certainly not with our tax dollars. I despise the woman's position. I don't think it is Christian at all. However, unless we protect her in this matter, the state can come after you and me for our ethical and value systems.

The very best thing is for the school now is to settle with a sealed order: the student will no longer discuss the case, the state college will allow her to transfer her credits without prejudice to a private school counseling program that will accept her, and the state will pay her tuition.
As Valarie points out in her post, the school did not weigh her religion in its decision.
 
Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation

The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.


Religious Discrimination
 
The conservative fag-bashers

:rofl: ... The Irony... The Irony... The Irony...

In summary:

Homosexuality = Choice = Not worthy of discrimination protection
Refusal to counsel queers = Choice = Somehow worthy of discrimination protection

That folks, is a clear cut example of hypocrisy. :thup:

I'm not for Discrimation Against Homosexuals.

If you are Referring to Marriage, they don't Qualify Naturally in thier Chosen Deviancy, and I am ALL for Civil Unions.

:)

peace...
 
Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation

The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.


Religious Discrimination

So, in other words a hospital must provide adjustments to a doctors work environment to allow him to pracitice faith healing on patients?
 
Ravi, I understand what you are saying, but the second the school got involved with the "why" of what she believed, it crossed the religious thresh hold. We flatly cannot have the state evaluating the "correctness" of religious belief, certainly not with our tax dollars. I despise the woman's position. I don't think it is Christian at all. However, unless we protect her in this matter, the state can come after you and me for our ethical and value systems.

The very best thing is for the school now is to settle with a sealed order: the student will no longer discuss the case, the state college will allow her to transfer her credits without prejudice to a private school counseling program that will accept her, and the state will pay her tuition.
As Valarie points out in her post, the school did not weigh her religion in its decision.

That has to be the school's defense. However, subpoenas of the internal memoranda of the defendants will give the school to validate what it has stated. Don't be surprised if it doesn't, though.
 
Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation

The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.


Religious Discrimination

So, in other words a hospital must provide adjustments to a doctors work environment to allow him to pracitice faith healing on patients?

I would suggest that perhaps it could be proven that relying on faith based healing could cause more than minimal problems.
 
Is it really a about religion? I think not.

For if it were about religion, then you'd have to concede agreement with the ruling if the woman's aversion to queers was simply her choice, and not based on religious convictions. Short of that, you'd need to concoct a contingency rationale to disagree with it.

lead1.jpg


What is that Sitting in this Beautiful Black Woman's Lap?...

:)

peace...


Irrelevent attempt at deflection. A true non-sequitur.

A sure sign that Mal has no move.

Check mate! :thup:

:lol:

Nope... I Assure you her Issues with Homosexuals are Religiously Based.

Mine are NOT.

I am ALL about "Free Will" and Letting God Judge...

But I will NOT Embrace Homosexuality as Equal to what Creates us in Marriage and Law.

I am Pro-Civil Unions and Anti-Persecution for Sexually Deviant Acts for Consenting Adults... And in Dante's case, Farm Animals.

Unlike those Tolerant Muslims who not only Deny them Marriage, but Deny them Life. :eusa_shhh:

Suck on that Bag-o-Cocks, mani!... :rofl:

:)

peace...
 
Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation

The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.


Religious Discrimination

So, in other words a hospital must provide adjustments to a doctors work environment to allow him to pracitice faith healing on patients?

I would suggest that perhaps it could be proven that relying on faith based healing could cause more than minimal problems.

So professional standards should be waived based upon a standard of how much problems they can cause?

What's "minimal"?

Counseling homosexuals by conversion theory has been shown to cause harm at worst, and be ineffective at best. Why should that be waived based upon a person's personal religious beliefs and inability to seperate her religion from her profession - like the faith healer?
 
Even though it has nothing to do with the case at hand, Jesus would frown on someone refusing to counsel a high school student because said student was gay.

True story.

This argument of hers is the argument of a false Christian and she is trying to use Jesus as a tool of divisiveness.
 
Even though it has nothing to do with the case at hand, Jesus would frown on someone refusing to counsel a high school student because said student was gay.

True story.

This argument of hers is the argument of a false Christian and she is trying to use Jesus as a tool of divisiveness.

If she was Allowed to Counsel the Homosexual on the Sin that Acting out as a Homosexual is...

Are you saying you would Support that Choice of Counseling?... :clap2:

:)

peace...
 
Question: How do you know when you've completely defeated Mal?

Answer: When he starts to quote you but reply to some imaginary shit you never even came close to saying or implying.

After the fourth time it starts to lose it's charm.

True story :thup:
 
So, in other words a hospital must provide adjustments to a doctors work environment to allow him to pracitice faith healing on patients?

I would suggest that perhaps it could be proven that relying on faith based healing could cause more than minimal problems.

So professional standards should be waived based upon a standard of how much problems they can cause?

What's "minimal"?

Counseling homosexuals by conversion theory has been shown to cause harm at worst, and be ineffective at best. Why should that be waived based upon a person's personal religious beliefs and inability to seperate her religion from her profession - like the faith healer?

Where has she said " I plan on converting fags?" It's a simple solution, she just refers them to a different counselor, problem solved and THAT is what the statute is supposed to make happen. Heck I would even say that in the case of your faith healer, they could let him work at the hospital, unless and until he failed to heal anyone at which point he isn't meeting job expectations and then you can fire him, what you could NOT do was say "You believe faith heals? Well noway are we going to employ you" assuming of course that he had met all the other requirements of employment.
 
Even though it has nothing to do with the case at hand, Jesus would frown on someone refusing to counsel a high school student because said student was gay.

True story.

This argument of hers is the argument of a false Christian and she is trying to use Jesus as a tool of divisiveness.

If she was Allowed to Counsel the Homosexual on the Sin that Acting out as a Homosexual is...

Are you saying you would Support that Choice of Counseling?... :clap2:

:)

peace...



Who said the counseling was even related to sexuality at all...???


She apparently refused the clients outright merely because they were gay. That means her bigotry, which she rationalized as her Christianity, was an obstacle to meeting the school's counseling program requirements.

Regardless of WHO she is assigned to counsel, the issue here was not HOW she would counsel them, only WHETHER she would counsel them.
 

Forum List

Back
Top