Constitutional Rights, Freedom of Association, Tolerance

Post date: Jul 11, 2015 4:43:51 PM

Constitutional Rights, Freedom of Association, Tolerance

Should all organizations be open to all and allow any and everyone to join (open membership) regardless of their beliefs? Must they make their membership lists public?

“Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld, against a First Amendment challenge, the policy of the University of California, Hastings College of the Law governing official recognition of student groups, which required the groups to accept all students regardless of their status or beliefs in order to obtain recognition.” (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Legal_Society_v._Martinez)

In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that a public college can refuse to recognize a religious student organization with an “all-comers” policy if its religious beliefs are effectively discriminatory...a student groups leadership policy now conflicts with the mandated nondiscrimination policy requiring membership and leadership in all official student groups be open to all. The groups must sign a nondiscrimination statement or be labeled as “unofficial”.

(http://www.religionnews.com/2014/09/08/christian-group-sanctioned-two-dozen-college-campuses)

It's interesting and frightening how our modern culture has redefined what it means to be “intolerant” and “discriminatory”.

“I am not sure exactly how it happened, but somewhere along the way people are no longer entitled to hold dissenting views. If a person has a view different than someone else it is interpreted as “well you hate me.” It is certainly possible to hold a divergent view and still affirm and accept the other person. Is it not? Disagreement and respect are not mutually exclusive.” -- Josh Fults

Tolerance was classically defined as “the fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc. differ from one’s own.” Tolerance: now means “The act of recognizing and accepting the equal validity and value of all views, beliefs and actions...This comes from pluralism which says all views are true.

This new definition of ‘tolerance’ is self refuting, it cannot live up to its own standard. Colleges, in making religious student groups be open to all beliefs systems, is itself being discriminatory and intolerant towards them. Society demands that Christians and their groups be “tolerant” toward non-Christians yet it itself is intolerant towards them. “They will accept any view as equally valuable except the claim that some views are not equally valuable...” This is ridiculous.

In addition, if we apply these new definitions of tolerance and discrimination to other situations (to be consistent) we would then pacifist groups being force to be open to non pacifist membership and leadership like militarists or Jihadists; feminist groups open to males; atheist groups to non-atheists; environmentalist groups to non-evironmentalists; terrorist groups to nonterrorists; civil rights groups to KKK adherents; LGBT groups to anti LGBT adherents; anti-nuclear groups to pro-nuclear groups; vegan groups to non vegans; Microsoft and Apple to open source adherents; abolition groups to slavery adherents; Republicans to democrates; Fraternities open to female memberships sororities to male memberships, etc. Social movements would be required to be open to those who have opposing views and beliefs.

* This is very similar to what happened in 1958 when “Alabama sought to prevent the NAACP from conducting further business in the state. After the circuit court issued a restraining order, the state issued a subpoena for various records, including the NAACP's membership lists. The Supreme Court ruled that Alabama's demand for the lists had violated the right of due process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution...”

In the end, “The Court decided in favor of the petitioners, holding that "Immunity from state scrutiny of petitioner's membership lists is here so related to the right of petitioner's members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in doing so as to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment" and, further, that freedom to associate with organizations dedicated to the "advancement of beliefs and ideas" is an inseparable part of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAACP_v._Alabama)

* in Texas, there is a demand for ministers to turn over their sermons.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/15/houston-pastor-sermon_n_5992044.html

* Notes:

1. Tolerance and Judging Non-Christians Worldview Cafe- https://sites.google.com/site/worldviewcafe

2. Apologetic Wednesday: I Disagree With You = I Hate You. Josh Fults

http://joshfults.com/2013/01/29/apologetic-wednesday-i-disagree-with-you-i-hate-you/

3. Fraternities and Sororities:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternities_and_sororities_in_North_America

4. California State University System

http://www.intervarsity.org/page/california-state-university-system