Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum
I agree that if you never even discuss why someone was disqualified for something, no one will be able to prove that you discriminated, but in this example, it would be clear that you did. And unless you are someone who generally believes that we have no obligation to follow laws we don't agree with, it's odd that you, Mr. Law Guy, would float this idea out there.
|
Truth be told, the way membership selection generally works does not lend itself to disclosure of reasons. Such things are never discussed outside of that room and the ballots are secret.
At any rate, even assuming that you could prove the discrimination occurred, it still might be legal since gender is one of the central aspects of men's and women's fraternities. Transgendered individuals may not meet that organization's requirements along those lines and therefore, the discrimination would be permissible.
The legislative intent is not to force college fraternities and sororities to allow members they don't want. The legislative intent is generally more along the lines of public services and accommodations, workforce issues, etc. At any rate, you never even get to that question because the person suing to get initiated has a burden of proof which would be impossible to prove. How does one prove the results of an unrecorded secret ballot and the reasons behind any one of the ballots cast against association (any of which would have sufficed to exclude that person)?
Impossible. Such a law would be completely unenforceable in the context of our organizations.
Transgendered folks can start their own organizations or they can join Southron's.
Threaded Mode
