A threshold question would be whether the HQ of Kappa Alpha Psi backs the discriminatory activities of the chapter. In other words, the route to proper redress doesn't necessarily have to be through the courts--if the national body reprimands its chapter, that pretty much tells us what we need to know.

I read the article, which seemed pretty short. Maybe I'm missing something here. He cited a gay slur through social media. I'm guessing someone used a nasty term about the guy but, can we all be 100% certain that his sexuality was the entire reason he was dismissed? I'm an LGBTQI advocate but, I also recognize that there may be times, as someone mentioned earlier, when someone just does not mesh well with the members. Why does it automatically have to be because he was gay?

WE don't have to be 100 percent certain. The university is.

I know this is venturing into membership selection, but how important is stuff like "fit" in NPHC organizations as compared to things like resume, service history and letters of rec?

It doesn't have to be the entire reason. If it was considered at all, it is discrimination, and that violates the university's policy. This is no different from a potential employer saying to a colleague "I think als463 was a great candidate, but she just got married. I wonder if she's planning to get pregnant soon."

Are we at the point yet that when someone isn't offered a bid, that they are refused that they can pul the disctimination card out?

Maybe the person was gay, but a real jerk? Do we have to take jerks now? Or someone smells bad?

PCNess is getting out of hand!

It's important but it depends on the organization, chapter, and circumstances how important it really is. Also consider that some orgs have legacy policies and others don't.

Right. And I am really not understanding why anyone would jump to the defense of this particular's chapter's "rights."

Did you miss the part where there is evidence that his sexuality was a factor in his being rejected? If there is a personality conflict, fine. But discrimination against somebody because he falls into a protected class is just wrong. It's a return to the bad old days of only rich Christian white men in fraternities.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. This is a chapter that was PROVEN to have discriminated against a candidate for factors that they were NOT ALLOWED to use in the selection process.

Are you serious? :confused:

People still use the phrase "politically correct" and its derivatives? :rolleyes:

If an applicant is a jerk, and the jerkiness is not about sexual orientation, there is no need to speak negative regarding sexual orientation. That includes slurs. :mad:

LOL at the smilies at the end of each sentence.

Tom, how often in your chapter, do you think your members text each other or worse, group text each other or tweet or Facebook about why they denied someone entry into your pledge program or removed them?

I hope never. It's terrible practice.

These kids, however, did that. They gave proof positive that they were discriminating, maybe illegally.

And the punishment didn't involve the school forcing them to accept this aspirant. It placed them on "probation" for a certain period of time. Hopefully, for the next few years, they can avoid tweeting that they denied membership to someone because of their sexual orientation... maybe lesson learned?

You both have good points and I'm not saying the university isn't 100% correct in thinking that was the case. I guess my question is how people would know outright that someone was denied for being homosexual? I mean, unless it was something like what happened at Alabama with not bidding African American women where it was outright said. My point was that sometimes, and I'm not saying it is definitely the case here, people don't get a bid because they have a bad attitude, aren't the types of people you would want in your organization, etc.

His sexuality was discussed in text messages.

If they had kept to their OTHER membership selection rules (secrecy), this would be a non-issue. How many times do we have to say if you are going to do something illegal, unethical or unkind, DON'T FRIGGIN BROADCAST IT!!!