UNC vs Christians in court now

[hoosier]

Oct 26, 2004 6:07 AMUNC fights frat's lawsuit
Christian group wants recognition

By JANE STANCILL, Staff Writer
UNC-Chapel Hill says it did not violate the constitutional rights of a Christian fraternity when it revoked the group's official recognition as a campus organization, according to a motion sent to federal court Monday.

Meanwhile, attorneys for Alpha Iota Omega asked the court Monday for a preliminary injunction in the case, an action that would force UNC-CH to restore the fraternity's status immediately.

The arguments by both sides make one thing clear: UNC-CH is in the middle of another court battle over First Amendment rights, just two years after it won a case over assigning freshmen to read a book about the Quran.

The state Attorney General's Office, which is representing UNC-CH in the matter, asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit. The university, according to the motion, was merely enforcing its antidiscrimination policy when it asked the fraternity to agree to allow any student to participate in the group regardless of personal characteristics such as race, religion or sexual orientation.

The three-member evangelical Christian fraternity refused, saying the antidiscrimination policy conflicted with the group's religious beliefs and standards of conduct. The university then revoked the group's official status, denying it access to money, university facilities and the use of UNC-CH's computer server to host the group's Web site.

The fraternity sued in August, claiming the university had violated the group's constitutional rights to free speech and association. The fraternity argued it should have the right to reject people who aren't Christian.

In Monday's motion, attorneys for UNC-CH cited a 30-year-old U.S. Supreme Court ruling that gives universities wide latitude to deny recognition to student groups that do not comply with reasonable campus rules. The motion pointed out that there is no constitutional right to official recognition on UNC-CH's campus. It said the antidiscrimination policy is meant to affect the conduct of student groups but not their speech, association or free exercise of religion.

The university declined comment on the case Monday. But in August, Chancellor James Moeser issued a statement that said, in part, "We are a public institution, and we cannot discriminate. That's the law. And that's why we are very comfortable with the position that we've taken on this issue."

Jordan Lorence, legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, said the university's actions constitute a fundamental violation of the right of free association. UNC-CH's argument confuses religion as a personal characteristic with religion as a set of beliefs, he added.

"The university singles out religious groups and says you cannot require people to adhere to your beliefs," said Lorence, whose group sued on Alpha Iota Omega's behalf.

Denying the fraternity official recognition severely limits its ability to communicate on campus, according to the motion filed by the Alliance Defense Fund. The fraternity's goals include evangelizing to members of the Greek community, and its code of conduct forbids sexual conduct outside of marriage.

[jubilance1922]

A similar situation happened at the University of Minnesota recently. Several Christian organizations sued to not have to follow the anti-discrimination policy. I believe the case was settled out of court.

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

if they dont want to adhere to the rules of the university, then they dont need to be recognized by the university. Same goes for al Qaeda, the KKK, the Nazis, etc.

[IheartAphi]

They only have three members and their main mission is to "talk jesus" with other greeks and tell people that sex is wrong outside of marriage. They can still go to Greek Organizations with their message, poster on campus, have a yahoo list serve, and have meetings off campus (which I would think would be preferable).

However, they want to be eligable for funding and website space to push their Christian Message, but don't want non Christians involved in it. I also think they will not accept someone who has had premartial sex as a member (the local paper mentioned that).

[NewBee]

You all can't seriously be comparing a Christian organization to the KKK or nazis. I mean come on. I don't understand why its so bad for a Christian organization to limit its membership. Social sororities have cut people because of something trivial as nails not being done or the wrong hair color or whatever. If someone has a serious reason why they feel they don't want non-Christian members, and its related to their faith then whats the problem? What does the fact that the only have 3 members have to do with anything?

[jubilance1922]

Originally posted by NewBee
You all can't seriously be comparing a Christian organization to the KKK or nazis. I mean come on. I don't understand why its so bad for a Christian organization to limit its membership. Social sororities have cut people because of something trivial as nails not being done or the wrong hair color or whatever. If someone has a serious reason why they feel they don't want non-Christian members, and its related to their faith then whats the problem? What does the fact that the only have 3 members have to do with anything?

NewBee, I think you are focused on the wrong thing. I personally don't have a problem with Christian orgs wanting to limit their membership. But I do have a problem with these groups feeling that they are exempt from anti-discrimination clauses. If they want to be a recognized student org, then they need to follow the rules set forth by that University. But there is nothing stopping them from being a non-recognized student org.

[IheartAphi]

I just have a problem with it because they want access to student funds and list serves, but they do not want to sign the anti discrimination clause. They are more than welcome to have their private, isolationist group as long as my tax dollars do not support it. They can preach all they want in the Quad and attend any greek faith sessions they are invited to.

The fact that its only 3 people is relevant because its not like this is a massive group wanting the rights to the university. Their membership has not increased with all the publicity and I imagine that this group won't last past their current three's graduation. I think they are doing this to raise a stink and "set an example" on a liberal campus like UNC.

I think religious GLO are great things, but they should be open to all kinds of memberships and faiths. If this group wins, groups like the KKK and Nazis can form on campuses and receive student funds and tax payer dollars to run the electricity for their meetings, push their hate messages on univeristy websites, and various others ways that would reflect negatively on UNC and my State.

Also, there lawyer is out of state, which just kinda makes me think he is district hopping to find cases to push his agenda.

ALSO- At NCSU, there was a jewish girl in a Christian Sorority. I believe she was raised in a mix religion household, but they accepted her and loved her just the same. Also, a Christian Fraternity accepted someone as a member who had a very intimate video of him distributed without consent on the internet.

[NewBee]

Its not about discrimanation. The very purpose of most Christian organizations is to glorify Christ in some way shape of form and to carry out his message. A non-Christian can't do that. And whats more, why would a non-Christian want to join a Christian fraternity or sorority? I would see if there aren't other organizations out there, but there are plenty now and plenty more forming. I really do not see the difference in a social sorority saying that you can't be a member because you dont have the GPA or a Christian fraternity saying you can't be a member because you aren't a Christian. Organizations set forth requirements to get a pool of applicants equipped to carry out the work of the organization. Its not fair that because AIO is standing firm in their beliefs, they are being singled out. Any organization that is not open membership discriminates in some form. So because they, meaning other organizations, signed some form, but probably still discriminate, they can carry own with business as usual. Heck, there are still chapters of fraternities and sororities that probably haven't had minority members but they aren't being singled out. Everyone knows that new organizations already have it rough because they don't have the alumni support and history to fall back on. Its almost impossible for a non-recognized student organization to survive passed its present members let alone expand...

I am rambling but I can't help it. This case is going to set the precedent for not only new Christian organizations on UNC's campus but religious organizations all over America.

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

Originally posted by NewBee
This case is going to set the precedent for not only new Christian organizations on UNC's campus but religious organizations all over America.

The precedent is already set that for student organizations to receive recognition and/or funding from a public university they must adhere to the guidelines set forth by the school. UNC-CH recognizes stuorgs when they adhere to the university's non-discrimination policies.
If this GLO doesnt want to adhere to the policy, then they will not be recognized. Tough shit for them. I guess they can pretend to be martyrs for the Religious Right. "They're discriminating against us because we want to discriminate!"