California attempts to export tolerance

[spuwho]

For the last 5 years public universities have been methodically banning religious student organizations.   Most of these organizations charters did not permit LGBT leadership due to its inconsistencies with their statements of faith. With universities also carrying a "zero tolerance" policy towards discrimination, these groups have been losing registrations across the nation as they are removed.  Campus Life, Campus Crusade for Christ, Muslim Student Association, InterVarsity, Brothers of Islam have all been losing their status as student organizations.

To counter this trend, several states passed religious freedom laws which permitted these organizations to maintain thier existance on campus without attempts to change their charters.

Here comes California. The General Assembly passed a law in 2015 which took effect on 1/1/17 that bans any California state school from.participating at another state public school where there is not reciprocal LGBT rights.

Bring forward to today. After months of negotiation Cal and Kansas have announced that the AG of California will not permit them to sign a home/away sports agreement.

Several states now fall in the crosshairs of the California law. California schools will be banned from playing in those states.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/18644160/california-golden-bears-cancel-talks-series-kansas-jayhawks-lgbt-law 

[acme54321]

*Shrugs*

If that's what California wants good for them.  If they can't find any out of state opponents because of it that's their problem.

[finehoe]

For the last 5 years public universities have been methodically banning religious student organizations.   

What is the source of this statement?

When the first line in piece is an obvious falsehood (or as conservatives like to call them "alternative facts") how can what follows be taken seriously?

[finehoe]

To counter this trend, several states passed religious freedom laws which permitted these organizations to maintain thier existance on campus without attempts to change their charters.

Another untruth. "Religious Freedom" bills are about LGBT discrimination. Period.

[coredumped]

Why shouldn't an organization have the right to their own beliefs? Or are you opposed to it because it's on campus?

[spuwho]

For the last 5 years public universities have been methodically banning religious student organizations.   

What is the source of this statement?

When the first line in piece is an obvious falsehood (or as conservatives like to call them "alternative facts") how can what follows be taken seriously?

Sorry Finehoe, its not some alt-right, conspiracy driven, conservative drivel.

Here is a copy of Vanderbilts response to Intervarsity;

http://vanderbilt.edu/about/nondiscrimination/intervarsity-letter.php

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2014/september/wrong-kind-of-christian-vanderbilt-university.html 

At Cal State Long Beach

http://www.daily49er.com/news/2014/09/22/intervarsity-christian-fellowship-loses-official-csu-status/

http:// www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/380541/

Wright State University

    https://www.thefire.org/cases/wright-state-university-christian-group-banned-from-campus/

Slate spoke out on the situation and quoted a court case that came to the SCOTUS.

  http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/09/11/christian_groups_want_public_colleges_to_subsidize_their_anti_gay_discrimination.html

Enjoy your research!

[finehoe]

Sorry Finehoe, its not some alt-right, conspiracy driven, conservative drivel.

I guess it's just a figment of your imagination then.

Vanderbilt isn't a public university.  However

the nondiscrimination policy does not target religious groups. We have repeatedly said that we want religious organizations to remain and flourish at Vanderbilt, that we encourage all such groups to qualify for RSO status, and we have no intention of excluding non-registered student organizations from our campus. We are pleased that more than two dozen religious organizations have subscribed to the nondiscrimination policy and ...(b)y the same token, we have denied RSO status to at least one non-religious organization that sought to impose non-religious belief-based requirements for leadership positions.

Cal State Long Beach didn't "ban" the religious group.

InterVarsity will not be banned from campuses, nor will students be discouraged from joining. The group can preach on campus and distribute evangelical literature. Actually, this "catastrophic" threat to religious liberty will mean only one thing for InterVarsity: No longer will the group be permitted to receive benefits (namely, funding) from the public school system.

Wright State

agreed to grant an exemption to the CBF. The CBF received official recognition soon after.

These quotes all come from your own links.  As I said, the idea these organizations were "banned" is an obvious falsehood.  What is your motivation in spreading such misinformation?

[spuwho]

I guess its a matter of perspective.

I know what I read.

Are you agreeing with California's direction, or just the contextual remarks?

[finehoe]

I know what I read.

Do you?  Because you still haven't produced any evidence that backs up your claim that for the last 5 years public universities have been methodically banning religious student organizations.

Are you agreeing with California's direction, or just the contextual remarks?

I don't really have an opinion on it one way or the other.  California can do what it wants.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Banning them from campus?  No.

Banning them from the being recognized as a university affiliated student organization?  Yes.

[finehoe]

Banning them from the being recognized as a university affiliated student organization?  Yes.

No bans. Some universities have decided that since all students pay fees, then student organizations that accept those fees must accept all students.  That's a far cry from methodically banning religious student organizations.

[Adam White]

Banning them from the being recognized as a university affiliated student organization?  Yes.

No bans. Some universities have decided that since all students pay fees, then student organizations that accept those fees must accept all students.  That's a far cry from methodically banning religious student organizations.

That's what he said, basically.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

not really.

any student organization not open to all students would be similarly treated. Not because they are affiliated with a religious group, but because they are non inclusive.  Plenty of inclusive christian groups on campus that did not get non affiliated.

I see your point and agree, but the original statement in the article was about 'religious groups' per se. 

Discussing other non-religious groups inclusivity may parallel the topic, but it's not what this article's focus is about.

[Adam White]

not really.

any student organization not open to all students would be similarly treated. Not because they are affiliated with a religious group, but because they are non inclusive.  Plenty of inclusive christian groups on campus that did not get non affiliated.

That's exactly how I read Non Redneck Westsider's comment. Any non-inclusive organization can't be officially recognized by the university.

[finehoe]

...but the original statement in the article was about 'religious groups' per se. 

Discussing other non-religious groups inclusivity may parallel the topic, but it's not what this article's focus is about.

No it wasn't.  The original article said that California wouldn't let it's college sports teams travel to states that allow LGBT discrimination (think North Carolina).  It didn't say a word about what individual universities do with their student organizations, religious or not.

And in any event, the statement "for the last 5 years public universities have been methodically banning religious student organizations" is patently untrue.