Latest Supreme Court Ruling

[Josh]

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the University of California's Hastings College of Law can legally deny recognition of a Christian student group if it bars gays from joining, the Associated Press reports. The Christian Legal Society had appealed to the nation's highest court after the school denied funding and recognition to the group. CLS requires prospective members to sign a statement of faith and regards "unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle" as being inconsistent with that faith, the report says.

www.usnews.com/blogs/paper-trail/2010/06/28/big-supreme-court-ruling-hits-college-and-more-campus-news.html

Agree or disagree with their decision?

[Josh]

I disagree. However, this is just one more reason for Christians to not rely on cooperation or partnership with the state or federal government.

[Kirby]

I agree.

Private clubs with no connection to a federal or state agency can discriminate all they want. Ones recieving funding from or connected with a government (like a state run university) should not be allowed to discriminate.

However, this is just one more reason for Christians to not rely on cooperation or partnership with the state or federal government.

Very much agreed.

[Josh]

Don't you think it's a stretch to ay that Christian college groups receive "funds" from the state. I mean, they usually just get a room to hold a meeting in right?

[Josh]

So, Kirby, should anyone be allowed to join any such group on a college? Should an atheist be able to join a Muslim group?

For the record, I don't think such clubs should have membership per se, but they are going to have to make decisions about who should lead meetings, etc. and it seems pretty silly for an atheist to be able to lead a Muslim group or vice versa doesn't it?

[Kirby]

Yes, anyone should be allowed to join any club they choose. It does seem silly for an Atheist to lead a Muslim group, but I would think the group would think that silly too. After all, we talking about higher education, which is arguably best when it values diversity. To support clubs that discriminate negates the idea of holistic education.

Recognized clubs on large campuses recieve funding from student activity funds, usually. Largely, clubs are left to fundraise on their own, but there is a small amount of money in the budget for recognized clubs. This funding is a very small amount, perhaps enough to pay a stipend to a guest speaker, or printing costs for club signage.
Unrecognized clubs often are allowed a room to meet in to foster community, but recieve no funding.

[Josh]

Unrecognized clubs often are allowed a room to meet in to foster community, but recieve no funding.

Ok, well, that's the best option anyway. Go unrecognized!!!!

[Kirby]

I don't get why groups like the CLS want to discriminate anyway. I understand the view of morality they most likely hold, but they could learn much from gay people and other unrepentant sexually immoral folks.
And, like it or not, there are Gay Christians. (and straight Christians with differing sexual moralities.) We could argue forever about whether they are sinning or not, and whether they are "saved" or what have you, but these people identify as Christian. Ultimately, it is God who looks at the heart, right? So who am I to discriminate?

[Josh]

The New Testament teaches that not everyone who professes to be a Christ follower is one and that we are to assess someone's claims by their lifestyle-

1 John 2:1-6

1My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

3We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. 4The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: 6Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.

1 Cor. 5:11

But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler...

We don't have to consider someone a brother or sister in Christ just because they say they are. Of course we are to love everyone, and of course the church needs to be able to listen to anyone, but as far as partnership we need to be discerning.

As for these college groups, though, yeah, I don't see why they wouldn't just let anyone come and save the criterion for leadership.


Back to this issue at hand, I guess I'm divided.

I don't have a problem with groups having criterion for membership, so in that sense I am against attempts to legislate in this way. However, I don't think the church should be in bed with the government in the first place, so perhaps in some ways I would actually vote "agree".

Let's take another example, though. What if I owned a Christian bookstore and had employees? Should I have the right to refuse to hire someone because they are unwilling to abide by certain expectations that are in line with my ministry/ business?

I think I should.

[Kirby]

We don't have to consider someone a brother or sister in Christ just because they say they are.

Yeah, I agree, and that is what I was trying to say. I believe I said "people identify themselves as Christian". I just think it is a slippery slope and divisive to just say "You are not a Christain because of _________."

Your other example:

I draw the line between a ministry and a business. They are mutually exclusive. Businesses should and do have professional guidelines for their employees to follow while on the clock, but what they drink, who they sleep with, and activities they engage in should not matter if it does not affect teh bottom line of the business, no matter what kind of business it is. Certainly, professional behavior extends beyond the working day a little, but i think you see what I mean.
Ministry is vastly different then business because it transcends the 9 to 5 work day. I'm sure you know Josh, that it is 24/7. There is no "bottom line" so to speak to protect. It is about service, love, and support - things that can be damaged with immorality.
I don't think business and ministry can effectively mix. Choose one or the other, or keep them separate.
I worked for a Christian bookstore for a spell, and we had very diverse employees. Some were very pious, and others not so much. There was plenty of morality and immorality, just like any other workplace. If an openly gay person had applied to work there, I doubt they would have been hired, but if they had excellent product knowledge, good customer service skills, and a professional demeanor, I think it would have been a poor business decision not to hire them.

Now, let's say Aletheia had a need (and budget for!!) a choir director for your new choir. Would you consider someone "unrepentantly pursued a sexually immoral lifestyle" No! It would be a detriment to your ministry, distract from what you were trying to accomplish, and contradict your beliefs about a person in church leadership. To me, that makes sense.

Business has a different set of morality, especially within capitalism. I'm not saying it has to counteract Christianity, or that aChristian can not be a good business person, I just think to build a business within a STRICT framework of Christian morality is a recipe for failure, since it would most likely directly affect the bottom line, the measure of success for a business.

[Josh]

I had a feeling your experience at "Christian supply" would come up.

For the record, I'm very leery of any mixing of business with ministry (even paid ministerial staff). However, I do have a soft spot in my heart for a good, independently owned Christian bookstore (which are becoming rapidly extinct)

[robin]

However, I do have a soft spot in my heart for a good, independently owned Christian bookstore (which are becoming rapidly extinct)

Indeed. I was very sad to see Pilgrim's close last year.

[Kirby]

Good, indepently owned bookstores of any kind are becoming rapidly extinct. Big boxes and the internet killed that market.

[robin]

In all fairness, the consumers doomed those mom and pop shops. I buy from Boarders, and Barnes and Noble, and have for a number of years. There were some books that Pilgrims carried that the big stores did not, but that market was pretty small. Although I miss the little shops, I don't blame the large retailers for offering a superior product that serves a larger audience.

We live in a consumer driven market where we get to decide who survives and who doesn't. People like to blame Walmart for destroying small business, but just look at how many people are buying from their stores. The consumer has decided that the small retailers are no longer viable.

[Kirby]

People like to blame Walmart for destroying small business, but just look at how many people are buying from their stores.

That is because Walmart (and other big boxes) fool people into thinking they are getting the same product for cheaper. In reality, they are getting a substandard product that they will have to replace more often.

As for books, most independent mom and pops would gladly order whatever you need. You would just have to wait a lttle bit. For me, it's worth the wait to support the independents.
As for Borders and Barnes and Noble, Powell's beats them any day. Usually, not only does Powell's have what i am looking for, they have it used, which I prefer.

I think we should celebrate independents!! In fact, lets make Sunday Independents day! ;D ;D ;D

Wait, weren't we talking about the Supreme Court Ruling?