Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Gunslinger on November 07, 2005, 10:25:48 AM
-
This is really starting to anger me. This ACLU commie bullcrap is one day going to go too far. People really need to start opening there eyes to crap like this and start drawing a line with our universities. I especially love the line "As a state employee, you and I have a responsibility to make sure we are providing an environment that does not put undue pressure on any member of our halls in terms of religion, political parties, etc.," Yea like they'd probably stop him if he was organizing an anti-war ralley.
Bible study policy raises ire
UW-Eau Claire resident assistant can't lead group
By RAQUEL RUTLEDGE
rrutledge@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Nov. 3, 2005
Every Tuesday last school year, Lance Steiger took a Bible to the basement of his dormitory at UW-Eau Claire and led a small group of friends in a discussion about a particular chapter or verse.
Advertisement
Steiger, a resident assistant and a junior at the time, said he was never told he could not lead a Bible study in the dorm where he worked helping students adjust to college classes and campus life.
But in July, he got a letter from school administrators warning him that if he continued to hold Bible studies in his dorm this year, he would face disciplinary action.
The issue has spawned a flurry of heated exchanges between Steiger, school officials, civil liberties groups, and at least one U.S. representative who on Thursday called the university's position "outrageous and un-American."
Essentially state employees
The university forbids resident assistants from hosting religious or political activities in the dorms where they work to ensure that R.A.'s are accessible to all students, said spokesman Mike Rindo. Resident assistants are essentially state employees. They receive free room and board and a $675-per-semester stipend in exchange for nurturing and counseling dorm residents.
"R.A.s are free to engage in these activities as long as they are not doing it in an environment where they have supervisory roles over other students," Rindo said.
In a Sept. 22 e-mail to Steiger, Deborah Newman, associate director of housing and residence life, elaborated on the university's position.
"As a state employee, you and I have a responsibility to make sure we are providing an environment that does not put undue pressure on any member of our halls in terms of religion, political parties, etc.," Newman wrote. "As a 'leader' of a Bible study, one of the roles is to gather and encourage people to attend. These two roles have a strong possibility to conflict in your hall."
The university's position is backed by a similar written policy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and is supported by the Freedom from Religion Foundation in Madison.
"There's free speech, but this isn't free," said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom from Religion Foundation. "This amounts to taxpayer subsidy of worship."
Chris Ahmuty, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, said his organization is looking into the issue. Ahmuty agreed with the university's position that state employees should not be organizing religious or political events on work time or place.
"The function of the R.A. is almost like a big brother or big sister," Ahmuty said. "When they're in the dorm they're an R.A. 24/7. . . . This isn't like a jail situation where students have no other alternative. They can go off campus."
Only a handful of the school's 120 resident assistants have been hosting Bible studies in the dorms, Rindo said. Steiger said he knows of more than 10 who either hold a class in their room or elsewhere in dorms.
The school's policy, which also applies to political and ideological activities, is communicated to new resident assistants during a verbal orientation and is not in writing, Rindo said.
Steiger sees the ban as an infringement on his First Amendment rights.
"I work for the school. It's my job, but I do have personal time. I should be able to talk about whatever I want to talk about in my own room. It's my home. It's where I live."
Steiger sought help with his cause from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a Philadelphia-based non-profit organization that defends freedom of speech, religious liberty and other rights.
The organization sent a letter Oct. 10 to UW-Eau Claire's interim chancellor, Vicki Lord Larson, calling the ban on R.A.-led Bible studies unlawful and an "immoral restriction of religious liberty."
"Unless they're on the clock 168 hours a week, which they're not, they have dual capacity as do all state employees," said David French, president of the foundation. "They have private lives. . . . We're not talking about Bible studies as part of an official R.A. function. We're talking about on their own time a function that is completely optional."
The issue caught the attention Thursday of U.S. Rep. Mark Green (R-Green Bay), a UW-Eau Claire alumnus.
Green wrote a letter to UW System president Kevin Reilly urging him to investigate policies at other University of Wisconsin campuses and to "rid the UW system of this deplorable mandate."
"The question is are we going to follow them when they go to bars? Are we going to conduct room-to-room searches to make sure nobody is praying?" Green said in an interview. "They do not surrender their Constitutional rights just because they're R.A.'s."
UW-Eau Claire officials said they are examining past and current policies and will respond to Steiger's complaint in the coming weeks.
A taxpayer subsidy of worship????? give me a break.
EDIT: oops forgot the link
-
"Unless they're on the clock 168 hours a week, which they're not"
Actually, they are.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Yea like they'd probably stop him if he was organizing an anti-war ralley.
If the RA did it in the dorm, they probably would stop him/her.
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
"Unless they're on the clock 168 hours a week, which they're not"
Actually, they are.
-SW
Wow I didn't know we got labor that cheap in America. At $675 a semester that equates to $0.33 an hour. So does that mean he's not allowed to go to church or drink or have relations with a consenting adult because he's "on the clock"
Micky what does that have to do with anything. He works for that room that the school provides him. As long as he's not making people attend than it should be his own business.
-
Is he forcing anyone to come? If not this is BS he should be able to do it as long as he is not forcing people to attend.
-
As a Resident Advisor they're job is to be on hand for anyone on their floor at any time that needs help unless other arrangements have been made with other RAs.
You should look up how much room and board costs at a college, then add that into the $675/month - its quite expensive.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
As a Resident Advisor they're job is to be on hand for anyone on their floor at any time that needs help unless other arrangements have been made with other RAs.
You should look up how much room and board costs at a college, then add that into the $675/month - its quite expensive.
-SW
So because of this you are saying that the school has the right to abridge his freedom of religion?
-
No, I am saying he is an employee of the state. While in employment, he can't lead anything racially/politically/religiously driven. Quite clear that if he did it off campus, he'd have been fine. Or if he just participated but did not lead/organize it.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
No, I am saying he is an employee of the state. While in employment, he can't lead anything racially/politically/religiously driven. Quite clear that if he did it off campus, he'd have been fine. Or if he just participated but did not lead/organize it.
-SW
Yea and I'm sure they'd crack down on a Muslim RA leading prayers in his room. Serioulsy you buy into that? Again what a crock, this is a clear violation of civil rights and no one really cares cause the kid is a christian because OBVIOUSLY this clouds his judgment as an RA and there's NO WAY he can be non-biased when dealing with his dutys and his religion just HAS to interfere with his job.
-
If you think this is a crock you probably didn't read it.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
If you think this is a crock you probably didn't read it.
if you don't think this is a crock you probably never read the constitution.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Yea and I'm sure they'd crack down on a Muslim RA leading prayers in his room. Serioulsy you buy into that? Again what a crock, this is a clear violation of civil rights and no one really cares cause the kid is a christian because OBVIOUSLY this clouds his judgment as an RA and there's NO WAY he can be non-biased when dealing with his dutys and his religion just HAS to interfere with his job.
Has nothing to do with his being Christian, has everything to do with him organizing and leading a religious gathering on campus while he is on-call.
You are simply choosing to be offended because you appear to be looking for a persecution here.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Has nothing to do with his being Christian, has everything to do with him organizing and leading a religious gathering on campus while he is on-call.
You are simply choosing to be offended because you appear to be looking for a persecution here.
-SW
What does being on call have to do with this? So you are saying that being an RA he has to give up his religious freedoms?
-
No, but he has to abide by the school's policy.
Like I said, do it off campus or have someone else organize it and then participate. Problem solved.
-SW
-
paaaleeeez!
You would be OK with an RA holding a Democratic party meeting? Republican? Libertarian? Cretin Druid? Muslim? Jewish? Satanic?
Unfortunate that the conservative movement in this Country thinks special favors need to be given to certain folks just because they are Christian.
Frankly I'm glad that the person put in charge of making sure 18 year olds have a smooth transition into college life are not trying to force some kind of personal agenda on them. It only makes sense...
oh BTW read the establishment clause.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
paaaleeeez!
You would be OK with an RA holding a Democratic party meeting? Republican? Libertarian? Cretin Druid? Muslim? Jewish? Satanic?
Unfortunate that the conservative movement in this Country thinks special favors need to be given to certain folks just because they are Christian.
Frankly I'm glad that the person put in charge of making sure 18 year olds have a smooth transition into college life are not trying to force some kind of personal agenda on them. It only makes sense...
oh BTW read the establishment clause.
Yes he can do all of those things as long as he's not forcing others to go and he does not mix it with his duties/responsabilities as an RA. No where in the article does it say he's trying to force anything and I'm sure there's RA's that attend rallies and what not.
This is basically saying that because he's a christian he cannot perform his dutys and his INDIVIDUAL actions would constitute an endorsment of religion by the state?????? Sorry I don't buy it. It's like saying a city utlity worker that's on call can't go to church on sunday.
If the kid were a muslim and were leading prayers and the school tried this crap the diversity/PC nannies would be all up in arms and the students would protest (and by the looks of it they'd probably burn some cars while they were at it)
SW
The school's policy, which also applies to political and ideological activities, is communicated to new resident assistants during a verbal orientation and is not in writing, Rindo said.
-
RA's in the UW system have room and board compensated in addition to the $675. So it's not a bad idea to stay up and handle a few drunk freshmen for that kinda benefit. And Eau Claire is a small bellybutton campus, walking across the street to study wouldn't be that difficult.
-
Seems to me like the 'right' wants it both ways...
Can't have stem cell reasearch done in a building funded by feds, even if you were to fund all the experimental costs privately.....(unless you use the mouse polluted strains)
So now, when it comes to useing publicly funded buildings for religous reasons the 'right' has a cow?
All they are saying is they can't use the dorms, where they are in a postion of power, to hold bible studys which they LEAD.......
So which way do you want it 'righties'? Don't see how you can have it both ways.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Yes he can do all of those things as long as he's not forcing others to go and he does not mix it with his duties/responsabilities as an RA.
His duties and responsibilities as an RA are in force whenever he is in the dorm.
The rule is clear. You'd think a good christian boy would follow the rules.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
His duties and responsibilities as an RA are in force whenever he is in the dorm.
The rule is clear. You'd think a good christian boy would follow the rules.
uhhhh what rule? The article states that there is no WRITTEN policy concerning this.
Are you saying that because he's a christian he cannot do his duties as an RA?
You'd think a state run school wouldn't infringe on civil rights.
The school's policy, which also applies to political and ideological activities, is communicated to new resident assistants during a verbal orientation and is not in writing, Rindo said.
-
Originally posted by BluKitty
Seems to me like the 'right' wants it both ways...
Can't have stem cell reasearch done in a building funded by feds, even if you were to fund all the experimental costs privately.....(unless you use the mouse polluted strains)
So now, when it comes to useing publicly funded buildings for religous reasons the 'right' has a cow?
All they are saying is they can't use the dorms, where they are in a postion of power, to hold bible studys which they LEAD.......
So which way do you want it 'righties'? Don't see how you can have it both ways.
no one has the Constitutionally protected right to stem cell research. I do however, have the right to practice my religion. This isn't just a state building it's the kids dorm room. I suppose he's not allowed to say his prayers at night or read the bible in there either? Yes the left are clearly champions of peoples rightsunless you are a christian
-
So it's not a rule cause it's not in writing?
You've posted twice now the the rule is communicated to new RA's. So what is the problem?
The RA has a right to practice his religion. He does not have the right to do it as an agent of the State. Simple really.
-
ya .. the horriblly opressed christan....
they never said anything about the RA doing bible studies ... or even leading a bible group
They don't find it appropriate for them to be the LEADER of a religous orginization while under the active employ of the state.
What if the principal of a public high school wanted to hold a Koran study group that THEY lead-In the school? Would that be ok with you?
What if the pricipal wanted to hold a Wiccan study group THEY led? Would that be ok?
It's a point about religion and govement being seperated. They are state employies at work, LEADING a bible group while your in a postion of state power isn't seperation. They could hold & lead thier bible study at a local church, no? This issue is about the public building they use, and the status given to RA's.
Would you have a problem with a RA leading Koran studies? Would that allienate them from you? Is the dorm the proper place to lead this type of thing when you are state employee? Why is it so out of line that the RA is asked to LEAD the study groups elsewhere?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
So it's not a rule cause it's not in writing?
You've posted twice now the the rule is communicated to new RA's. So what is the problem?
The RA has a right to practice his religion. He does not have the right to do it as an agent of the State. Simple really.
But you are saying he is ALLWAYS an agent of the state there for it is an infringment on his rights. If the rule isn't written in the schools policies it isn't a rule.
-
Originally posted by BluKitty
ya .. the horriblly opressed christan....
they never said anything about the RA doing bible studies ... or even leading a bible group
They don't find it appropriate for them to be the LEADER of a religous orginization while under the active employ of the state.
What if the principal of a public high school wanted to hold a Koran study group that THEY lead-In the school? Would that be ok with you?
What if the pricipal wanted to hold a Wiccan study group THEY led? Would that be ok?
It's a point about religion and govement being seperated. They are state employies at work, LEADING a bible group while your in a postion of state power isn't seperation. They could hold & lead thier bible study at a local church, no? This issue is about the public building they use, and the status given to RA's.
Would you have a problem with a RA leading Koran studies? Would that allienate them from you? Is the dorm the proper place to lead this type of thing when you are state employee? Why is it so out of line that the RA is asked to LEAD the study groups elsewhere?
Your examples arent the same, if said principle wanted to hold them at his house or residencey that would be ok with me as long as he isn't pushing this on his students. I wouldnt have a problem with any RA doing any kind of religious study as long has he did it in the privacy of his room and on his own time (but it's established that RAs don't have there own time so there fore his rights are infringed apon)
-
He has every right to take another job.
Where have I heard that kind of argument before?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
He has every right to take another job.
Where have I heard that kind of argument before?
so you are saying you don't care about his civil rights?
-
No State employee has the right to promote a religion at work. You want the RA to have special rights cause he's christian?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
No State employee has the right to promote a religion at work. You want the RA to have special rights cause he's christian?
no because of the fact that it is said he is working "all the time" he cannot practice his religion in his own private mannor. This is not a state endorsment of religion if the INDIVIDUAL chooses to practice it on his own. I would be ok with any other relgious person wanting to do the same.
This is like saying a congresmen isn't allowed to pray at all because he works for the govt. He's ALLWAYS a congresmen and live in tax payer subsided quarters. What a person does on there own time is their business. This is also akin to saying somone in the military can't practice their religion in their barracks room, base house, or even off base residence. It is an infringment of basic rights.
Based on your postings I would suppose you would agree that this person could not write editorials for the newspaper or publish a book either?
-
I don't see how his religious freedoms are being violated in any way.
Just like any job you cannot practice your faith at work with people you have authority over.
-
Originally posted by Mighty1
Just like any job you cannot practice your faith at work with people you have authority over.
So, if the President was to say, "God Bless America." to his cabinet, he could be impeached?
-
What if the President were to say ALLAH ACKBAR to his cabinet!!!!!
Would carl rove start wearing a turbine?
-
the point is because it is IN a goverment building where this RA works ....
Just like a Prinicipal of some High School wouldn't be allowed to have Koran study hour in the PUBLIC SCHOOL...
Sure if they want to go lead a Koran or bible group at the local Mosque or Church.... have fun ... the point is about the employee status and the state funded building. Do you not understand that?
-
So again, the President could not say, "God Bless America." to his cabinet (because he has authority over them) and he cannot say it in the White House because that is a government funded building, even though it is his home?
There are no right or wrong answers... guarantee this will go to the Supreme Court.
-
Originally posted by Delirium
There are no right or wrong answers... guarantee this will go to the Supreme Court.
you are delirious.
-
Originally posted by BluKitty
the point is because it is IN a goverment building where this RA works ....
Just like a Prinicipal of some High School wouldn't be allowed to have Koran study hour in the PUBLIC SCHOOL...
Sure if they want to go lead a Koran or bible group at the local Mosque or Church.... have fun ... the point is about the employee status and the state funded building. Do you not understand that?
no it takes place in a dormatory. Having a principle do it in school and an RA do it in his dormatory room are two completly different things. One is a public buidling used to teach students and the other is a public building used to house students. This is not a govt endorsment of religion but a personal practice there of.
This isn't the same thing as saying a person can't do it at work because he is allways on call and he lives were he works. If he get's to use his room for other personal things why not personal religion wich is a civil right no less.
All this boils down to is the school wanting to protect their bucget from ACLU lawyers and cracking down on personal freedom. I don't see how anyone could say this is an endorsment of religion. This is his personal room with his personal belongings and everyone that's there is doing so under their own free will and they are doing something that is constitutionally protected.
There's alot of things you can't do while you are on the clock but being on the clock and being on call are two entirely different things. If it effected his duties as an RA than sure I can see that but no were does it state that any inpopriaties have taken place.
-
He was holding a group meeting IN THE BASEMENT with the same kids he is supposed to be assisting. He is in a govt. building on govt. time promoting a particular religion.
If this isn't clear than I have 2 words....
hello wall.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
He was holding a group meeting IN THE BASEMENT with the same kids he is supposed to be assisting. He is in a govt. building on govt. time promoting a particular religion.
If this isn't clear than I have 2 words....
hello wall.
that's a crock considering he's ALLWAYS ON CALL but not ALLWAYS WORKING. I'm sure he forced all them other kids there to worship....HOW EVIL OF HIM huh.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
that's a crock considering he's ALLWAYS ON CALL
Not when he's off campus.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Not when he's off campus.
-SW
some would call that an "undue burdon" considering he lives there.
-
something to think about,
The founder of the American Civil Liberties Union was a card-carrying communist whose goal was to undermine the Judeo-Christian foundations of America.
As indicated by the writings of its founder, Roger Baldwin: “I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class… Communism is the goal.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property” Karl Marx.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
seems to me these two men had a lot in common.
-
not that I want to jump into far out stuff, and the article does say the ACLU is thinking of taking up the case wich would be a credit to them. THe ACLU (and the FAR left for that matter) have done alot to pursue the communist agenda in the US:
Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. An American communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings," substituting shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.
Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."
Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and television.
Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural and healthy."
Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of "the big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the communists took over. Obliterating the American past, with its antecedents in principles of freedom, liberty and private ownership is a major goal of the communists then and now.
Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture – education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
The ACLU was founded in the 1920s by Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman, described as a "progressive" and "the perfect feminist."
Earl Browder was general secretary of the Communist Party of the United States from 1930 through its dissolution in 1944. When the party was reconstituted as the Communist Political Association later that year, Browder was chosen as its president. Browder proudly proclaimed that the ACLU functioned as "a transmission belt" for the party. To deny the ACLU's founding was attached at the hip to communist organizations is to deny what can easily be proven as truth.
-
lives and works there.... they aren't saying the RA can't LEAD.....
(please note the keyword LEAD you so readily ignore in your arguements)
...............they aren't saying the RA can't LEAD a bible study on campus.... just not in the building where they work and live. The RA's can practise religion all they want, where they want, it's takeing a religious LEADERSHIP role in a govemental building, where they are govermental employee with a leadership postion.
Why can't this person go have bible study in the campus greens or something? .....just give up the leadership postion in the building where they are employed?
You can ignore the arguement and focus on unrelated details if you wish.... doesn't change what this is about....
-
Originally posted by BluKitty
lives and works there.... they aren't saying the RA can't LEAD.....
(please note the keyword LEAD you so readily ignore in your arguements)
...............they aren't saying the RA can't LEAD a bible study on campus.... just not in the building where they work and live. The RA's can practise religion all they want, where they want, it's takeing a religious LEADERSHIP role in a govemental building, where they are govermental employee with a leadership postion.
Why can't this person go have bible study in the campus greens or something? .....just give up the leadership postion in the building where they are employed?
You can ignore the arguement and focus on unrelated details if you wish.... doesn't change what this is about....
again, "undue burdon"
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
some would call that an "undue burdon" considering he lives there.
Not exactly. He's working there so he can live there.
Were he to no longer be employed by the university, he would no longer be subject to their policies. The burden is his, he can choose to hold his group thing off campus where he is not subject to the school's policy regarding R.A.s, or he can quit and again, not be subject to the school's policy. It's his choice.
His freedom of religion is not being touched, it's his ability to hold a group discussion on religion while assuming the position as a school representative that is being stopped.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Not exactly. He's working there so he can live there.
Were he to no longer be employed by the university, he would no longer be subject to their policies. The burden is his, he can choose to hold his group thing off campus where he is not subject to the school's policy regarding R.A.s, or he can quit and again, not be subject to the school's policy. It's his choice.
His freedom of religion is not being touched, it's his ability to hold a group discussion on religion while assuming the position as a school representative that is being stopped.
-SW
Again this isn't a school policy it was a statement made at a meeting. and I would say he lives there so he can go to school there not so he can work there. In exchange for his services the school provides him a room and board.
-
Essentially state employees
The university forbids resident assistants from hosting religious or political activities in the dorms where they work to ensure that R.A.'s are accessible to all students, said spokesman Mike Rindo. Resident assistants are essentially state employees.
The school does not allow it, whether it was said at a meeting or not. Although I can't find where they said this in a meeting.
And then this:
The university's position is backed by a similar written policy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison
He can live off campus and still go to school. Clearly he is working there so he can live there.
-SW
-
"I work for the school. It's my job, but I do have personal time. I should be able to talk about whatever I want to talk about in my own room. It's my home. It's where I live."
"Unless they're on the clock 168 hours a week, which they're not, they have dual capacity as do all state employees," said David French, president of the foundation. "They have private lives. . . . We're not talking about Bible studies as part of an official R.A. function. We're talking about on their own time a function that is completely optional."
The school's policy, which also applies to political and ideological activities, is communicated to new resident assistants during a verbal orientation and is not in writing, Rindo said.
-
It is a policy, it says it right there. It doesn't have to be in writing to be a policy. They communicated the policy and the person accepts it when they accept the position.
-SW
-
reaaal simple fix for the RA ... stop being a RA....
take out a loan, join the debt generation.
_____________________________ _
another point........If this person is really doing thier own thing on thier own time ... how did the school even find out about it...
flyers? what? how is it that anyone even knows if it's not a leadship role the RA took? Seems like the RA must have advertised the meeting in some manner. Missed the details if that was written.
-
Originally posted by BluKitty
reaaal simple fix for the RA ... stop being a RA....
take out a loan, join the debt generation.
_____________________________ _
another point........If this person is really doing thier own thing on thier own time ... how did the school even find out about it...
flyers? what? how is it that anyone even knows if it's not a leadship role the RA took? Seems like the RA must have advertised the meeting in some manner. Missed the details if that was written.
sure it could have been a flyer but all it takes is one person to complain before somones civil rights get trampled on in the name of political correctness. I don't think it's right to make the RA quite, as long as he can do his job there shouldn't be any reason he couldn't practice his religion in peace.
-
-
what about the rights of the others who live in the dorm not to be subjected to a "crazy bible thumping RA" as they might see it. Private practise, practise away from THAT dorm, whatever... the point is about the other students civil rights too.
You don't have to agree with that point .. I don't know if I do... but they have civil rights too, the other dorm students.
Another resident posting flyers is one thing ... your RA is something else. Are residents required to read postings by RA's?
-
Originally posted by BluKitty
what about the rights of the others who live in the dorm not to be subjected to a "crazy bible thumping RA" as they might see it. Private practise, practise away from THAT dorm, whatever... the point is about the other students civil rights too.
You don't have to agree with that point .. I don't know if I do... but they have civil rights too, the other dorm students.
Another resident posting flyers is one thing ... your RA is something else. Are residents required to read postings by RA's?
who say's they're being subjected? You have a nice view of Christians there BTW. "crazy bible thumping" Do you stereotype all cultures religions races and creeds or just the ones that you don't like.
As far as the other students I fail to see how their rights are being infringed apon.
-
If I were a student with any dissenting beliefs/practices, I would feel uncomfortable approaching this guy for every day problems. As a (let's say Muslim) student with a roommate disagreement, how akward would it be to need your RA to handle a dispute and find him and many others hunched around bibles, speaking the written word. Kind of brings on a feeling of alienation, I would say. It is important for someone in that stature to be as unbiased as possible. I'm not saying the guy would side with those of the Christian faith every time, and I'm not suggesting that he remove his beliefs for the sake of a job. It would just be in the best interest of his dorm-mates if he catered to everyone as well. I hope most of what I'm saying makes some kind of sense.
-
Originally posted by RightF00T
If I were a student with any dissenting beliefs/practices, I would feel uncomfortable approaching this guy for every day problems. As a (let's say Muslim) student with a roommate disagreement, how akward would it be to need your RA to handle a dispute and find him and many others hunched around bibles, speaking the written word. Kind of brings on a feeling of alienation, I would say. It is important for someone in that stature to be as unbiased as possible. I'm not saying the guy would side with those of the Christian faith every time, and I'm not suggesting that he remove his beliefs for the sake of a job. It would just be in the best interest of his dorm-mates if he catered to everyone as well. I hope most of what I'm saying makes some kind of sense.
in otherwords christians need not apply because we "offend people" Seriously I can't beleive what I'm reading. It's not like somone's going to interupt human sacrifice night, were talking a biblical study group. If somone is offended by that then they are entirly too sensative. I mean seriously I though we were preparing people for the real world and such. I though in America we didn't discriminate based on sex creed race religion or sexual preference. Isn't that what we are talking about here? Saying this guy can't peacfully practice his religion because it MIGHT offend somone or it MIGHT do this or the aclu MIGHT sue them or it MIGHT look bad. I'd love to see the muslims reaction if the college said no Koran studies.
So if gayness and gay people offend me an RA could not be gay, because we wouldn't want him unapproachable by a student now would we?
-
E-mail from Associate Director of Housing and Residence Life Deborah Newman to Lance Steiger, September 22, 2005
From: Newman, Deborah L.
Sent: Thu 9/22/2005 10:38 AM
To: Steiger, Lance Lee
Cc: [REDACTED]
Subject: RE: Question for you
I would prefer that RAs not lead Bible studies in the hall in general, and here is the reason. As a state employee, you and I have a responsibility to make sure we are providing an environment that does not put undue pressure on any member of our halls in terms of religion, political parties, etc. As an RA you need to be available to your residents both in reality and from their perspective. As a "leader" of a Bible study, one of the roles is to gather and encourage people to attend. These two roles have a strong possibility to conflict in your hall. I have shared with other RAs who have asked this question, that as an RA we also want you to encourage other students to develop leadership skills, and one of the ways you can do that is to encourage other students in your hall to actually lead the Bible study. I also want to clarify that you can certainly attend Bible studies in your hall. I just want to make sure we don't put ourselves in a position where we fail to meet the needs of all of our students, either on purpose or by accident! Please feel free to come in and speak with me about this if you would like.
Deb
Doesn't look like a "policy" has been violated just a "prefference"
-
You aren't even arguing what is going on.
You are going on and on about this issue thinking he can't worship, or he can't be Christian. He can do that, he just can't lead a bible study on campus as a R.A. as it is against school policy.
That's all there is to it, there isn't persecution here that you seem to wish existed.
-SW
-
For Hopefully rational consideration:
Key question: where does the right of the individual bacome important in an on call governmental job? Everything else hinges on this. Let me break it down.
1) No one would argue that the EMT on call couldnt lead a Sunday School (or the Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, or whatever equivalent) when he was technically on call for his duties. In that situation, there is clear physical separation between place of employment (station house) and place of religious activity. Aside from location, the other key difference is CLEAR ABSENCE OF OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT of the religious activity. However, the illustration effectively negates teh "on-call employee" aspect of the argument.
2) The location argument is two sided.
a. Would the class be a problem in his room any less than in the basement? I think you could effectively argue that a RA's "office" was his room, since that's where the majority of his student interactions would take place. Or, does being a government employee mean that he cannot have any outward hint of religion in his job -- the position that many in this thread think they are espousing. Does that meant that he cannot have a cross on his wall -- since his dorm room is also his office? Does he have to hide his Bible (or Koran, for that matter)? Can he WEAR a cross or a religious T shirt? IN other words, does the fact that he LIVES there mean that his personal practice of religion must be HIDDEN from those he responsible for serving? And, what if his religious beliefs include a command to talk about his faith (which Christianity explicitly does.) Are christians (and others with similar faith sharing beliefs) forbidden from having on cal goivernment posisitons?
b. Courts have been clear that religious organizations must be provided the same access to public facilities as secular ones. If others can hold group meetings of any sort in the dorm meeting room, religious groups must have equal access. The basement location is irrelevant; the issue is whether he indeed is precluded from teaching his fath as long as he holds the job. By this interpretaion of separation, why would it even be OK for him to attend teh thing with people who knew he was RA??
3) So, when does activity by a governent employee amount to even implicit endorsement? Do government employees need to forsake their rights to talk aboiut their faiths, as a condition of employment? Since this guy has potential resposibilities 24/7, and since Christianity teaches that faith should penetrate every part of our lives, are you seriously requiring him to quit?
OR
In the absence of coercisive behavior by the RA, wouldnt a disclaimer -- like radio stations play before controversial talk shows -- completely negate the religious establishment question? Why wouldnt this be ok? Particularly when 2 important civil rights conflict (here the right of individuals to practice their faiths vs the freedom from governement established religion), shouldnt their be openness to solutions which honor both?
Lastly, the procedural issue -- if an employer has a policy, it is completely unenforcable if it isnt written down. Period. The policy needs to have apeeals, rational, interventions all spelled out. This guy should be 100% off the hook, and any employment lawyer who wanted to could eat the university for lunch on this one.
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
You aren't even arguing what is going on.
You are going on and on about this issue thinking he can't worship, or he can't be Christian. He can do that, he just can't lead a bible study on campus as a R.A. as it is against school policy.
That's all there is to it, there isn't persecution here that you seem to wish existed.
-SW
What if that is just as much a part of being a christian to him as it is the study himself? Why take that away from him and who are we to judge what's right and what's wrong as long as he does his job like he supposed to. And no I have strayed a little but I am responding to posts in this thread.
-
So if gayness and gay people offend me an RA could not be gay, because we wouldn't want him unapproachable by a student now would we?
no don't go half way ..... it would have to be gay, and sending out flyers wanting a gay-study groups....
or hetro study groups , sending out flyers on how to study how to be hetro?
or a muslim study group, sending out flyers for Koran study night? etc etc .....
should a RA be LEADING a cause in the dorm they are supposed to be superviseing?
they are asking that the RA leads the cause, whatever it may be, at another place
Is it the place of the the RA to be a leader/activist at their dorm? What if it was for pro-life or pro-choice meetings?
-
School policy, he must have been told when he became a R.A. and therefore agreed to it.
Knowing that, he should have found another means to have the bible study - like find a place off campus.
If he was never told the policy, then the issuance of basically a cease and desist told him. At this point it's up to him to fight the school policy to have it changed, or the school won't change and he'll have to agree to their policy or quit as a R.A. There are particular requirements of certain positions, and if you don't want to abide by them then you won't be staying in that position. Easy enough. Would you be as heated if this were an issue of a democrat R.A. holding a political meeting?
-SW
-
Gunslinger, in your rush to accuse the left or aclu (by the way they said they would look into it, they didn't initiate this) of being anti-christian you seem to of picked the wrong story. When he is in his room it works as his office and that means he's on the job. i don't see where his rights are being infringed upon. I mean hell they told him he could go to them just not lead them in his room or he can even have them outside of the dorm. Sorry just don't think you thought about this one long enough before you posted.
-
Originally posted by parker00
Gunslinger, in your rush to accuse the left or aclu (by the way they said they would look into it, they didn't initiate this) of being anti-christian you seem to of picked the wrong story. When he is in his room it works as his office and that means he's on the job. i don't see where his rights are being infringed upon. I mean hell they told him he could go to them just not lead them in his room or he can even have them outside of the dorm. Sorry just don't think you thought about this one long enough before you posted.
yes and I said earlier that I wish the ACLU would help out, it would do them credit but they are a widley know anti-christian organization. They probably won't be available for this because holliday season is coming and they will be out prowling for "offensive" santa clauses and nativity scenes.
Either way restricting how he participates in the group is still a restriction of religious practices. I could see if he was out in the hallways every night nagging people to come but that doesnt be the case here. To me it seems like the school is pre-emting any future problems by restricting the RA's freedom.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
oh BTW read the establishment clause.
No, YOU read it. Never mind the fact that it doesn't apply to this situation, you obviously cannot grasp that all it does say is the the Feds cannot ESTABLISH a religion nor prevent one from being practiced.
It means that the Feds cannot establish or endorse a religion as the OFFICIAL and REQUIRED religion of the United States (this was done SPECIFICALLY to prevent something akin to the Church of England) and they can't single out and ban the practice of a particular religion.
NOWHERE in the "establishment clause" is there anything stating that religion of ANY type MUST be EXCLUDED from anything even remotely connected to the government.
For crying out loud, I wish they'd teach freaking English in the schools instead of drivel.
-
Originally posted by JBA
seems to me these two men had a lot in common.
They're both dead.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
No, YOU read it. Never mind the fact that it doesn't apply to this situation, you obviously cannot grasp that all it does say is the the Feds cannot ESTABLISH a religion nor prevent one from being practiced.
It means that the Feds cannot establish or endorse a religion as the OFFICIAL and REQUIRED religion of the United States (this was done SPECIFICALLY to prevent something akin to the Church of England) and they can't single out and ban the practice of a particular religion.
NOWHERE in the "establishment clause" is there anything stating that religion of ANY type MUST be EXCLUDED from anything even remotely connected to the government.
For crying out loud, I wish they'd teach freaking English in the schools instead of drivel.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Doesn't say STATE religion or even A religion it says OF RELIGION. Maybe you need to read it in French?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Doesn't say STATE religion or even A religion it says OF RELIGION. Maybe you need to read it in French?
either way that has nothing to do with a STATE school. and it's funny how you liberals allways cut off the second part
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
-
Originally posted by Sandman
They're both dead.
Oh I call libruhl on you !
-
Cut federal subsidies to schools, problem solved.
Gunslinger,
"no one has the Constitutionally protected right to stem cell research."
Why the heck would you want to limit your rights and freedoms? It was my understanding that the Bill of Rights was written to make make sure that explicit rights were written down. But, that the implication was that freedom and the power to make choices was to be assumed to be had by the citizens, and the government should have as little power as possible...cause government is teh bad.
Yet, I see people on this bbs saying "No one has the Constituational right to do 'X' "
By implication it means that the government can deny people doing "X", how the heck can anyone support that?
-
Suave you assume that by me saying somone doesn't have the right to something that I don't support it. That's another issue.
What I said was a valid comeback to a pretty biased qusestion. Last time I checked stem cell research or even the persuit of science for that matter wasn't in the constitution.......religious freedom was so his point was flacid.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
so you are saying you don't care about his civil rights?
Its not his civil rights that are being defended by the rule. Its the civil rights of those who he has been given authority over.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Its not his civil rights that are being defended by the rule. Its the civil rights of those who he has been given authority over.
so you are saying he doesn't have civil rights in this case? I don't see how the people he's been given authority over have had their civil rights infringed apon...explain.
-
You've fallen off the deep edge with this one, Gunslinger. He can pray in his room, he can join in a prayer group, he can even go to church . . . in the Ecumenical Religious Center ON CAMPUS. He just can't LEAD a religious or political meeting for the students he supervises...on campus. He could, however, walk across the street and lead a prayer meeting there.
There are certainly some things going on in the U.S. that are cause for concern in going too far to eliminate religion to make people feel "safe" from being preached to, but this isn't one of them.
-
Trying to understand something here. Please explain how others' civil rights are endangered by the RA leading a bible study in the dorm, available to peaceable assembly by like-minded individuals. Seems to me the constitution specifically addresses a right to assembly by the people.
I am of the understanding the Bill of Rights is a misnomer, as it does not grant rights so much as it points out what Congress cannot do. The government has no rights. People have rights. Sooo...constitutionally speaking, yes the RA's rights are under attack, and if pursued in litigation (as a constitutional case) he has pretty solid constitutional means to continue with his bible study, as long as it's non-mandatory to attend. There is also the issue, as previously mentioned, of discrimination if other secular groups are allowed assembly space in the dorm.
One of two outcomes would be to either deny any and all groups from assembly in the dorm (so as not to discriminate), or drop the discrimination and move on with new business. Having perused a few websites concerning obligations and such of resident advisors, and having noticed almost universal consistency of the duties and obligatiions amongst the universities, RAs are to submit their plans for any activities to the head RA before putting plans in action. If this was done, and he was given the OK, then he followed procedure correctly.
Given that RAs are for the most part consciensious and responsible student staff members, cognizant of the fact they represent the university and work as a team with other RAs, it is hard to imagine a deliberate breaking of the rules on his part. Simply too much would be at stake for him to lose his stipend and face possible disiplinary action (and consequently possible action to other RAs in his team.)
I therefore suggest that perhaps this is being done on the whim of some superior agent of the university to cover their own sorry butt in the interest of political correctness, which is so pervasive on campus these days. As Guns so eloquently put it, it is a crock. I hope this is sorted out eventually by common sense, however travesties of justice such as this case seems to be must be placed under scrutiny and met with eternal vigilance.
Les
-
It's fine when it's a Christian, potentially leading and converting others to the One True Faith . But, if you open the door for Christians you open the door for everybody and have to deal with the consequences. 7th floor -- that's the Scientology floor. 3rd, that the Democrat floor. 5th -- Republicans run that. I want to stay on the 3rd next semester because Brandon has that interesting Wicca thing going every Thursday night.
It is an atmosphere where a person in power can influence people who are, in some cases, very vulnerable. Just think of the Cult potential (for those of you who differentiate Christianity form other "cults"). Jenny goes away a good Lutheran and by the end of the semester she's a Scientologist. Maybe she would have found that way herself, but the helping hand of Renee, the trusted and comforting RA sure made it easy for her to find what she was missing with her homesickness. So, if you want bible study you have to want and accept all of the many alternatives. It would make more sense, IMO, to keep those separate.
Charon