i think it's good that this thread can express so many different viewpoints...i also think that it's such a shame that people can compare cutting a girl because she's a lesbian to wearing a certain type of clothing or not having the right grades...

what we do can be classified as discrimination to some people, though i think that it's not about cutting people down until you get the least common denominator for your pledge class, i think it's about seeing if these girls can work effectively in a group and be friends...so some people on this thread must think that a bisexual or gay girl won't find at least one friend in their chapter, because that's the only acceptable reason i can think why you would choose to disregard her academics, her leadership skills and her character in favor of a label...it's just as ridiculous as the poor comparison given before of cutting a fat girl just because she's fat and disregarding the fact that she's a math whiz or a KIND PERSON...

yes, we have the right to choose who we want to be in our organization, a right that is protected by years of tradition and is a beautiful thing...as voltaire said "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"...but i don't think that we should abuse that right in order to make us feel "safe" and only choose people who look, talk and act like us...is an organization better because it has no gay people? better if it had ALL gay people? it's the quality of person, not the label that makes their membership effective, how they can add to the cloth of the sorority and make our picture look wonderfully different...why can't some people feel sisterhood towards a gay girl? don't they think that putting people into one tiny box is wrong? we all have more to each other than others think. i may be a theatre major, but i am so much more. you may be a soccer player, but you're so much more. and you might be gay, but again you are so much more than some label that someone tries to pin on you. why can't some people feel sisterhood for someone who might be gay, but also have your interests and ideals for the chapter? why are sisters afraid of this?

kappaloo and sugar and spice-Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that an ADDITION to the bylaws and not a part of the original ones?

What makes it impossible for someone to file a lawsuite against a fraternal organization demanding equal rights to membership for women?

edited because I hadn't read it. AXOKatie , I think you made a beautiful post and I agree with what you say on so many levels. I am just against a mandate.
Lets face it-Susie may vote against you because you're gay, but she will never SAY that's why her vote went that way.
Ooops-didn't mean to rhyme.

A Jewish member who knows an organization is founded on Christian principles has to weigh whether or not she'll be comfortable in that group. Same with the atheist and Sigma Chi. If they're willing to compromise their beliefs to go along with the group's bylaws, that's their choice. As a non-Christian who has chosen to be a part of a group founded on Christian principles, I can say that I've yet to find anything about Tri Delta that bothers me, since I'm allowed to frame our Christian principles within my own context. I imagine the Jewish girls in my chapter or the Sigma Chi atheists feel similarly, but of course I can't speak for them.

Tri Delta's non-discrimination policies include this statement: "The members of Delta Delta Delta, assembled in Convention for 50th time in the history of the organization, acknowledge and affirm that Delta Delta Delta, in its selection of members, does not discriminate on any basis other than gender, and expressly will not discriminate on the basis of ethnic heritage, national origin, personal appearance, personal beliefs, race, religion, or sexual orientation."

I don't see how it could be much more simple. Although this clause was not part of our founders' intentions, it is a part of my organization today. As soon as I signed my bid card, I was agreeing to go along with my GLO's rules as long as I was a member.

Right to Association
 

This is in response to JAM's Question:

I'm not an attorney, but I understand that private organizations have a right to restrict their membership for any reason. I mentioned this earlier in this thread, but country clubs are another example where it is perfectly legal (I didn't say socially acceptable) to restrict members based upon gender, race, religion etc. Where clubs have eased there restrictions, its been because of public opinion, not threat of legal action.

Rumor has it that the country club down the street from me wouldn't accept Michael Jordan as a member. I don't think they have any Jewish members either (I think you have to be Irish/Catholic and a Notre Dame alum, but I could be wrong there, I don't have the $$$ to even try to get on the waiting list!)

If GLOs accept taxpayer dollars (is there any public university-owned Greek Housing?), then this wouldn't apply, but as long as they are private organizations, lawsuits against them wouldn't go far.

Re: Right to Association
 

That makes sense. And the point about housing...I would think that too comes into play. On the country club issue-I think this has been challenged several times. Yet, I recall a case where an exclusive men's club was sued and forced to accept women because they proved it was a business network or something like that. I have too much clutter in my head. Anyway, for the time being I have fallen behind on the daily toils of being a Mom and housewife. I have REALLY enjoyed this. If no one ever challenges our thinking, if we don't exercise our minds, we remain stagnant. To all of the opposing side, I will integrate parts of what you have said in my thinking! If this keeps going, in my Terminator voice-"I'll be back!":p

I don't know what's in our original bylaws ( I wish I did!!), but I don't believe that Kappa has a statement saying that we will not discriminate by sexuality (Kappas - correct me if I'm wrong!). However, it doesn't say that I can discriminate against people based on sexuality either. This is different from gender/grades/financial obligations in the fact that for those it's explicitly said that we will "discriminate" on those factors.

I know it's a factor of comfort, but I really do feel that most people would be comfortable with anyone from the GBLT community once you got to know them. They really just like anyone else. I think that's why this all bother me, because someone's grades/attitude/presentation (aka the normal "cutting" basis) does say something about the person as a person; but sexuality alone says nothing of the person or there value to the organization.

(I have quite a few gay/bisexual friends if you can't tell)

Wow, this thread sure has gone on really long, I think everone needs to agree to disagree. We are not going to see eye to eye on this topic. I am from NJ so yes things are a lot different than they would be in the Midwest. I think it is up to the individual sisters in the organization on how they react to GLBT sisters. I am lucky because my sisters are all open-minded and loving and they all know that I didnt pledge to sleep with them or find a girlfriend, and thats not the reason other girls join as well. Yes someone might be attracted to one but a TRUE sister does not persue it. And yes there are still a lot of people who wouldnt know how to act around gay/lesbians, how about you treat them they way you would treat anyone else, they are not aliens you know, and thats what boggles my mind about some people. Anyway this is getting to be so long, just one more thing, there are quite a few white people in NPHC, I have met a lot of them.

Re: Re: Right to Association
 

Me too. I can't imagine what a mess my brain will be in another 20 years. :p

I really wish I could figure out the name of the other NPC sorority that adopted the "no discrimination based on sexuality" policy -- can anybody help me out? I've done a couple of searches already and have found nothing.

:rolleyes: I wouldn't say we're do gooders. I'm thrilled we have the right to choose because some girls just are not worthy of my letters, or of anyone. I would say that we're living the parts of our creeds that tell us to "be nice to everyone and play fair." Once again, how do you think it because universally okay in sororities to not discriminate on race? Chapters at the individual level starting taking African-American women, and then it got put in national bylaws. Same thing with taking Catholic women. I am still ashamed that there are members of my sorority who would cut you just for being a lesbian. Yes, I am from up north and have no idea what a large school's recruitment is like - but if you're going to be that shallow, you aren't living by the ideals of Gamma Phi Beta, and I KNOW that at least according to creeds, most other groups have those values. Like <b>sugar and spice</b> said, there are lots of ways we can still discriminate, and I don't think sexual orientation should be one. I'm embarassed that it's not in our bylaws yet.

Wasn't not discriminating about religion also an addition for most orgs? I realize some were founded without religious requirements, but they all weren't.

Re: Re: Right to Association
 

JAM, I totally agree with you - I think this is one of the better arguments we've had on GC in a while. ;)

Re: Re: Re: Right to Association
 

I can tell you it's not us. I *think* it might be Phi Sigma Sigma, but I'm not positive.

I dunno I might be missing something but it seems like most people here agree except for one thing. A lot of people seem to be pointing out that an inherent feature in the Greek System is discrimination (you choose what that is based on) because of our selective membership process. People seem to be attacking this statement and that is just going to compound the problem in our chapters. Because someone isn't comfortable with homosexuality it does not necessarily make them a 'bad' sister or unworthy of the letters. We all know the meaning of our letters and are ready to judge those we deam worthy of wearing them. That is great and idealistic but i don't think there is one woman who can stand up and say that she is the perfect model of sisterhood and ABC letters. It just isn't possible; we have ideals and goals in mind that is what we strive for. Our creed talks about what we believe in and striving to reach those goals, not that we have reached them and are suddenly 'deemed' worthy with a vote. We have to work for them. Some women need to work towards accepting something they (and a large part of society) are not comfortable with. Education in the Greek Community is important, especially about issues like homosexuality, rape and alcohol.

Instead of whining I'm curious how many Greek orgs here on, on a regular basis, sponsor activities/discussions w/ the GLBT group on your campus?

The Greek council focused on it last year and we've come a long way on our campus to making our groups more friendly and breaking down the barrier, but it is work . We still have a long way to go, and i hope those sisters of mine who are homophobic will eventually learn to be more tolerant of other people, esp other sisters.

Ok this is way too long but it annoyed me to read some of the comments. No one is better than anyone else JUST because they are tolerant of sexual orientation. I'm sure people did not mean to say they were, but it just comes off preachy sometimes (so i preached!, yea i'm hypocritical!) Sorry!

Tau love
Lil E

I can see every side of this issue. To be honest, I never knew a PNMs sexuality until after recruitment. It had nothing to do with keeping it a secret before recruitment per say, but just that they have been at school longer and I have more of a chance to know them.

I would love for Kappa Delta chapters across the country to share my belief that diversity in a chapter is more than "Ooh! Susie's a math major, and I'm pre-med! We're different!" "I'm blonde and she's a brunette...different!!" But it's not going to happen. And that's ok. I can only represent myself and my beliefs.

Voting is a chance for you to personally express what you feel a PNM can bring to your chapter. I have no clue how chapters run their voting, but I wouldn't guess that when it comes to crunch time, each individual has to stand up and justify their opinion. So as long as people are voting they way they want, that just the way it is. Period.

Random note: This is one of the most intense threads I have seen in the Rush forum. All of this heated debate gives me a feeling like I'm back in school preparing for rush. Once these PNMs on the board get through rush, maybe we'll go back to being sedate. LOL :)

Kappaloo: AFAIK, Kappa does not yet have a clause, policy, or position statement regarding sexuality. I'll go home and check out our constitution after work (this has piqued my curiosity).

More substantive response with my personal views coming soon; I just want to take some time to think about it.