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

[Ravi]

mal often tries to make things up to prove a point that doesn't exist.

 

[manifold]

mal often tries to make things up to prove a point that doesn't exist.

ats

 

[JakeStarkey]

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?...



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.

You will lose on that rationale, Valerie. The school audited her religious belief. Her lawyers will enter that evidence into court, and she will win on appeal.

 

[Samson]

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?...



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.

Obviously, the school teaches Their Grad students to question clients about their sexual preference. Otherwise, it wouldn't be an issue.

 

[jillian]

Mal...do you think that a college should give someone a degree when they are unwilling to do some of the required work?

I Think they have made Exceptions for Beliefs in the Past...

I bet they wouldn't Require a Vegitarian to do some things that might be Required...

And hell, they gave Ward Churchill Tenure without doing almost ANYTHING!...



peace...

From your article:

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

she wasn't expelled because of her BELIEFS... she was expelled for refusing to do her training properly.

d'uh...

last i heard, they expel you for that sort of thing.

 

[Ravi]

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?...



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.

You will lose on that rationale, Valerie. The school audited her religious belief. Her lawyers will enter that evidence into court, and she will win on appeal.

Is it possible that you are confusing this case with the Jennifer Keeton case?

She was allowed to express her views in class and in her writing. She was not allowed to refuse to counsel someone because they were gay.

 

[jillian]

yes, that we don't respect the 1st amendment and anyone who wants to counsel people that homosexuality is morally wrong, cannot do so

and yes, you need the degree to get the job or start your own practice

i am amazed how how the left hates free speech and freedom of religion, no, i guess i shouldn't be....the left fumes when schools are required to teach creationism, yet has no problem with mandating that we force people to believe homosexuality is morally right

Have you ever read the first amendment?

It has nothing to do with individuals and possible consequences of your speech. When you say something...there is always the possibility of a consequence

The government just can't punish you for speech...private individuals can

it is a public school...hence, it is the government

and they did nothing prohibiting her from exercising her religious beliefs. she was expelled for not doing what she was required to do for her training.

you know, there are some jobs that some people just can't do... a muslim and an orthodox jew can't work in a meat store that sells pork and refuse to handle the pork.

that's life.

she loses on appeal, too.

 

[Coyote]

Mal...do you think that a college should give someone a degree when they are unwilling to do some of the required work?

I Think they have made Exceptions for Beliefs in the Past...

I bet they wouldn't Require a Vegitarian to do some things that might be Required...

And hell, they gave Ward Churchill Tenure without doing almost ANYTHING!...



peace...

From your article:

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

she wasn't expelled because of her BELIEFS... she was expelled for refusing to do her training properly.

d'uh...

last i heard, they expel you for that sort of thing.

Exactly. And, the important part: change her behavior, not her beliefs

 

[Ravi]

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?...



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.

Obviously, the school teaches Their Grad students to question clients about their sexual preference. Otherwise, it wouldn't be an issue.

Valarie, this twit has me on ignore because I made him cry. Tell him that the sexual orientation was discovered because it was in the patient's file...not that the school or anyone else asked people their orientation.

 

[Samson]

Mal...do you think that a college should give someone a degree when they are unwilling to do some of the required work?

I Think they have made Exceptions for Beliefs in the Past...

I bet they wouldn't Require a Vegitarian to do some things that might be Required...

And hell, they gave Ward Churchill Tenure without doing almost ANYTHING!...



peace...

From your article:

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

she wasn't expelled because of her BELIEFS... she was expelled for refusing to do her training properly.

d'uh...

last i heard, they expel you for that sort of thing.

Yep, the expulsion has nothing to do with her religious belief: she refused to counsel queers.

The question is: how, or even, why, she would need to know the sexual preference of the subjects she was assigned to counsel? What sort of school teaches that this information makes a critical difference?

 

[jillian]

I Think they have made Exceptions for Beliefs in the Past...

I bet they wouldn't Require a Vegitarian to do some things that might be Required...

And hell, they gave Ward Churchill Tenure without doing almost ANYTHING!...



peace...

From your article:

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

she wasn't expelled because of her BELIEFS... she was expelled for refusing to do her training properly.

d'uh...

last i heard, they expel you for that sort of thing.

Yep, the expulsion has nothing to do with her religious belief: she refused to counsel queers.

The question is: how, or even, why, she would need to know the sexual preference of the subjects she was assigned to counsel? What sort of school teaches that this information makes a critical difference?

you have to be able to counsel EVERYONE to graduate. what you do after is up to you.

what kind of person picks a program they know they can't complete? did she think she could pick and choose.

now, back to my hypothetical meat store... would you suggest that the owner of such a place has to keep on a muslim who refuses to do that part of their job that requires they handle pork products?

or if such a person works in a school lunch room, where they are employed by a governmental entity ... should he or she have the right to pick and choose because he or she is a muslim?

i'd suggest that the people who are all for this woman would be appalled at the muslim in my hypothetical.

 

[Valerie]

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?...



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.

You will lose on that rationale, Valerie. The school audited her religious belief. Her lawyers will enter that evidence into court, and she will win on appeal.

Can you see the post I was replying to???



She was removed from the graduate program in school counseling because she refused to separate her personal beliefs from her professional requirements. Those requirements do not mandate her to change her religious beliefs nor do they mention how she would counsel people she felt morally superior to.



"She was removed from the school’s counseling program last year because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.

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

 

[Yurt]

From your article:



she wasn't expelled because of her BELIEFS... she was expelled for refusing to do her training properly.

d'uh...

last i heard, they expel you for that sort of thing.

Yep, the expulsion has nothing to do with her religious belief: she refused to counsel queers.

The question is: how, or even, why, she would need to know the sexual preference of the subjects she was assigned to counsel? What sort of school teaches that this information makes a critical difference?

you have to be able to counsel EVERYONE to graduate. what you do after is up to you.

what kind of person picks a program they know they can't complete? did she think she could pick and choose.

now, back to my hypothetical meat store... would you suggest that the owner of such a place has to keep on a muslim who refuses to do that part of their job that requires they handle pork products?

or if such a person works in a school lunch room, where they are employed by a governmental entity ... should he or she have the right to pick and choose because he or she is a muslim?

i'd suggest that the people who are all for this woman would be appalled at the muslim in my hypothetical.

problem with your hypo is....the muslim is protected and the employer must make reasonable accommodations for the the muslim

so in this case, according to current law, the school could have easily made reasonable accomodations....they should not be required to have her believe that homosexuality is moral....if she believes it is not moral according to her religious beliefs, she has a case against the school as the school could have easily accommodated her and not forced her to accept their beliefs

 

[Valerie]

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.

Obviously, the school teaches Their Grad students to question clients about their sexual preference. Otherwise, it wouldn't be an issue.

Valarie, this twit has me on ignore because I made him cry.

Tell him that the sexual orientation was discovered because it was in the patient's file...not that the school or anyone else asked people their orientation.

What she said.



"Tell him that the sexual orientation was discovered because it was in the patient's file...not that the school or anyone else asked people their orientation"

 

[Yurt]

Have you ever read the first amendment?

It has nothing to do with individuals and possible consequences of your speech. When you say something...there is always the possibility of a consequence

The government just can't punish you for speech...private individuals can

it is a public school...hence, it is the government

and they did nothing prohibiting her from exercising her religious beliefs. she was expelled for not doing what she was required to do for her training.

you know, there are some jobs that some people just can't do... a muslim and an orthodox jew can't work in a meat store that sells pork and refuse to handle the pork.

that's life.

she loses on appeal, too.

not according to the civil rights act....

 

[Samson]

From your article:



she wasn't expelled because of her BELIEFS... she was expelled for refusing to do her training properly.

d'uh...

last i heard, they expel you for that sort of thing.

Yep, the expulsion has nothing to do with her religious belief: she refused to counsel queers.

The question is: how, or even, why, she would need to know the sexual preference of the subjects she was assigned to counsel? What sort of school teaches that this information makes a critical difference?

you have to be able to counsel EVERYONE to graduate. what you do after is up to you.

So is there a special chapter, course, book, or whatever, about counselling queers?

If so, then why?

 

[jillian]

Yep, the expulsion has nothing to do with her religious belief: she refused to counsel queers.

The question is: how, or even, why, she would need to know the sexual preference of the subjects she was assigned to counsel? What sort of school teaches that this information makes a critical difference?

you have to be able to counsel EVERYONE to graduate. what you do after is up to you.

what kind of person picks a program they know they can't complete? did she think she could pick and choose.

now, back to my hypothetical meat store... would you suggest that the owner of such a place has to keep on a muslim who refuses to do that part of their job that requires they handle pork products?

or if such a person works in a school lunch room, where they are employed by a governmental entity ... should he or she have the right to pick and choose because he or she is a muslim?

i'd suggest that the people who are all for this woman would be appalled at the muslim in my hypothetical.

problem with your hypo is....the muslim is protected and the employer must make reasonable accommodations for the the muslim

so in this case, according to current law, the school could have easily made reasonable accomodations....they should not be required to have her believe that homosexuality is moral....if she believes it is not moral according to her religious beliefs, she has a case against the school as the school could have easily accommodated her and not forced her to accept their beliefs

the christian and muslim would be equally protected from discrimination.

no one required her to believe anything... they required her to complete the program and COUNSEL homosexuals without imposing HER religious beliefs on them in accordance with treatment standards.

the law only requires 'reasonable accommodation' when accomodation is reasonable. the muslim and this girl are both out on their butts.

 

[Yurt]

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.

once again manifold proves he is an intellectual midget....i fully support gay rights/marriage etc...however, this case violates the 1st amendment...it just so happens to be about homosexual beliefs vis a vis religion....

nice try, but fail

 

[Samson]

Obviously, the school teaches Their Grad students to question clients about their sexual preference. Otherwise, it wouldn't be an issue.

Valarie, this twit has me on ignore because I made him cry.

Tell him that the sexual orientation was discovered because it was in the patient's file...not that the school or anyone else asked people their orientation.

What she said.



"Tell him that the sexual orientation was discovered because it was in the patient's file...not that the school or anyone else asked people their orientation"

Obviously, someone had to ask about sexual orientation, or it wouldn't be on record.

Why would it be "in the file?"

Why would it be relevent for a Counselling Grad Student to know the sexual orientation of her subject?

 

[Ravi]

Valarie, this twit has me on ignore because I made him cry.

Tell him that the sexual orientation was discovered because it was in the patient's file...not that the school or anyone else asked people their orientation.

What she said.



"Tell him that the sexual orientation was discovered because it was in the patient's file...not that the school or anyone else asked people their orientation"

Obviously, someone had to ask about sexual orientation, or it wouldn't be on record.

Why would it be "in the file?"

Why would it be relevent for a Counselling Grad Student to know the sexual orientation of her subject?

Because the student brought it up.