Schools can have statements of faith but they can be denied accreditation because of them. Seems reasonable to me.
Why bother with accreditation? Isn't that a secular concern? Let your faith guide you to be strong enough to encounter different belief systems.
http://nationalpost.com/opinion/the-supreme-court-decides-that-faith-is-now-banned-from-canadas-public-spaces/
Fuck "identity politics" and "religous freedom" both, right in their faces.
ReplyDeleteBut this is an unabashed win!
really
ReplyDeleteThe story is slanted and the headline misleading. A law school that openly discriminates against people has no place in a free society. I also believe the court ruling went too far into other areas. It’s complex, and I’d like to read about this from a real news source, not a think tank with a grudge.
ReplyDeleteThis was an opinion piece Brian Arbenz so it's supposed to be slanted in interpretation. I think the facts are presented - the Supreme Court ruled accreditation can be denied because of the discrimination caused by restricting applicants. I fail to understand (well not really) why certain cohorts of Christians need to have their faith propped up with external rules. Does their God not hold them accountable enough? Nothing prevents any religious group from forming and making rules for their groups but their only legal tool for retribution is shunning.
ReplyDeleteIf I wanted to be a lawyer I would want as wide an experience as possible in order to form arguments that would appeal to the widest swath of jurists. But that's not really the goal of those who make a big show of putting their religion first.
YASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
ReplyDeleteAlso: it's the NPost, of course they'd be salty over a perfectly good thing happening to public spaces.
Fuck me
ReplyDeleteCass Morrison
ReplyDeleteSo you’re ok with publicly funded universities going directly against the Charter? Nice to see where you’re coming from.
Larry C. LyonsLyons? I am happy the lack of accreditation stands. They claim to be a private religious institution and are only publically funded because it's a registered charity - not because it's an educational institute. Personally I would love to see the public/catholic parallel systems dismantled and all religious based schools not tax deductible and not funded by public money. Children can attend religious classes on their own time.
ReplyDeleteCass Morrison
ReplyDeleteThe issue here is the intentional discrimination of a protected group. Since the school bans any sort of sex except within a heterosexual marriage, a married same sex couple automatically violates the rules. It is discrimination pure and simple. Moreover the law is not religious, and technically should be thoroughly agnostic.That is not the case with Trinity Western.
I believe, in the U.S. or Canada or any nation, all that is needed are Free Speech, Free Press and the Right to Peaceably Assemble. Those will protect any religious person or religious organization’s rights. They should be protected on the same basis as secular individuals and groups speaking and assembling. I have the right, and a group I’m in has the right to urge people to paint their houses blue. But I/we don’t have any right to foist that preference on anyone.
ReplyDeleteLarry C. Lyons right - so I'm glad they didn't get accreditation as a law school.
ReplyDelete