C
catholictiger
Guest
ok I have been in some discussions with people on religious freedom issues one of the discussions circled around the issue of college students being required to do something that will make them violate their deeply held religious values if they want to graduate. The example that brought out the most controversy was a girl from east Michigan who was required to counsel a gay couple in order for her to get her graduate degree. She refused and had to go through remediation in oder to graduate, she sewed the university saying her religious rights were violated.
bellow is the link to the case
alliancedefendingfreedom.org/About/Detail/4170
this case thankfully was a victory for religious freedom but there have been cases just like this that have resulted in defeat of religious freedom.
insidehighered.com/news/2012/06/27/judge-rejects-anti-gay-students-suit-against-augusta-state#ixzz2356znBNx
this case is kinda the same idea, religious student was required to support gay parents in a supportive non judgmental way, but because of her belief of the immorality of a homosexual relationship she couldn’t do this. They asked her to do a remediation program which she argued violated her religious beliefs.
the court said that the university wasn’t trying to change her religious beliefs and that her religious values wasn’t a reason to break professional standards that the university wants counseling students to be upheld to. So the court threw out her law suit and she lost.
So pretty much the argument is that the university is respecting her religious beliefs by not trying to force her to change her mind. Which I personally think is not true because how can a remediation program not be used to try to change someones mind. Secondly they argue that because the professional standards of the counseling profession includes counseling gays, she must follow these standards in order to graduate.
so now to my questions, this to me seems like a violation of our religious freedom and a slow taking away of our ability to fully live as Christian. If case number two is the case that the supreme court upholds than Christian Counseling students will be forced to counsel gays in a way that will violate their deeply held religious values and maybe for many cause christian students to leave the profession and go search other places.
but how would you argue against something like this because the argument will probably go something like this.
christian argues: this is a violation of her religious freedom she shouldn’t be forced to do something that will require to violate her own deeply held religious values in order to graduate.
atheist argues: well with that same logic you could say that its against my religious values that term papers are evil so I should be able to not write term papers and still graduate. The point is that if your religious values prevent you from doing something that it a standard of a person who gets a degree you can’t get the degree.
So how do we argue against this in a legal sense, how do you argue that religious freedom can’t be trumped by professional standards that don’t up hold religious values.
keep in mind if this argument is the accepted argument against religious freedom, this means that OBGYN students can be required to assist in abortions in order to get a medical degree. Social work students may be required to assist planned parenthood or a gay rights organization in oder to graduate. A Catholic counseling student may be required as part of her counseling for people struggling with sex to give them birth control, or a catholic pharmacists student be forced to sell birth control. All because professional standards require you to violate your religious beliefs.
I will accept anyone’s comments but I would like to hear from some legal experts who would be able to argue the legal side of things. Thanks and God Bless.
bellow is the link to the case
alliancedefendingfreedom.org/About/Detail/4170
this case thankfully was a victory for religious freedom but there have been cases just like this that have resulted in defeat of religious freedom.
insidehighered.com/news/2012/06/27/judge-rejects-anti-gay-students-suit-against-augusta-state#ixzz2356znBNx
this case is kinda the same idea, religious student was required to support gay parents in a supportive non judgmental way, but because of her belief of the immorality of a homosexual relationship she couldn’t do this. They asked her to do a remediation program which she argued violated her religious beliefs.
the court said that the university wasn’t trying to change her religious beliefs and that her religious values wasn’t a reason to break professional standards that the university wants counseling students to be upheld to. So the court threw out her law suit and she lost.
So pretty much the argument is that the university is respecting her religious beliefs by not trying to force her to change her mind. Which I personally think is not true because how can a remediation program not be used to try to change someones mind. Secondly they argue that because the professional standards of the counseling profession includes counseling gays, she must follow these standards in order to graduate.
so now to my questions, this to me seems like a violation of our religious freedom and a slow taking away of our ability to fully live as Christian. If case number two is the case that the supreme court upholds than Christian Counseling students will be forced to counsel gays in a way that will violate their deeply held religious values and maybe for many cause christian students to leave the profession and go search other places.
but how would you argue against something like this because the argument will probably go something like this.
christian argues: this is a violation of her religious freedom she shouldn’t be forced to do something that will require to violate her own deeply held religious values in order to graduate.
atheist argues: well with that same logic you could say that its against my religious values that term papers are evil so I should be able to not write term papers and still graduate. The point is that if your religious values prevent you from doing something that it a standard of a person who gets a degree you can’t get the degree.
So how do we argue against this in a legal sense, how do you argue that religious freedom can’t be trumped by professional standards that don’t up hold religious values.
keep in mind if this argument is the accepted argument against religious freedom, this means that OBGYN students can be required to assist in abortions in order to get a medical degree. Social work students may be required to assist planned parenthood or a gay rights organization in oder to graduate. A Catholic counseling student may be required as part of her counseling for people struggling with sex to give them birth control, or a catholic pharmacists student be forced to sell birth control. All because professional standards require you to violate your religious beliefs.
I will accept anyone’s comments but I would like to hear from some legal experts who would be able to argue the legal side of things. Thanks and God Bless.