"Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn and
cauldron bubble."[i]
The cauldron of ideological hostility toward religious
principles and people of faith at Yale Law School just boiled over, and its
discriminatory policies targeting religious students threaten to ooze
throughout academia and beyond. The school's new anti-religious policy illustrates
the extent to which some academic institutions—including medical and dental
schools--are willing to go to enforce secular dogma.
Law school withdraws aid from students who serve at faith-based ministries
An opinion
piece in USA Today outlines Yale Law School's new aid policy that
penalizes persons of faith:
"Under the guise of nondiscrimination, Yale Law School has announced it
will blatantly discriminate. A student is barred from aid if she works at a
synagogue that gives preference to Jewish applicants, but not if she works at
an organization that peddles anti-Semitism yet hires all comers. A
graduate is blocked from funding if she works for the Christian Legal
Society, but not if
she works for the Freedom from Religion Foundation. And a graduate is not
eligible to receive loan assistance if she is a professor at Brigham Young
University, but is
eligible if she works for Berkeley."
A Yale Law School student reacted
to the new policy:
"We are
deeply concerned about what this means for the future of religious and
conservative students at Yale. Who will want to attend a law school that limits
your professional opportunities because of your religious convictions? Who will
trust a school administration that buckles under pressure from an angry mob and
throws its religious and conservative students under the bus?"
Yale Law School's academic
version of an anti-religious pogrom advances an alarming campus trend of barring
believers from benefits accorded to other students.
Medical and dental student groups face ouster
Medical and dental students
who adhere to a biblical faith and/or to pro-life convictions face
discrimination at schools that otherwise allow student groups to qualify membership
based on sex (fraternities and sororities) and on other criteria related to groups'
missions, but not on religious faith.
Anecdotal reports from
Christian Medical and Dental Associations campus chapters include the
following:
·
At the School of Dental Medicine in a private
research university in Ohio: For 40 years, CMDA students had participated in a medical-dental
school chapter, but dental students were denied the ability to form their own chapter:
“The
group has not been approved because of the emphasis on God and especially
because of the Bible sessions as written in the proposal you send. [We]…feel
that it is not appropriate for us to endorse such activities."
·
At a large Illinois university: Administration
officials de-recognized a 30 year-old CMDA chapter. They claimed that the
chapter did not “meet the Board of Trustee’s policies regarding
non-discrimination” because the chapter’s leaders are held to moral standards. Administrators
wrote that because
“…students
are not eligible to be leaders of the organization if they do not believe in
God…your organization’s registration is denied.”
·
At the School of Dentistry at a midwestern Jesuit
university: Government funds were used to build a dental school building, but administrators
forbade the CMDA chapter from meeting on campus because they reportedly feared,
ironically, legal consequences related to federal non-discrimination laws.
 |
| (Author at far right) Lobbying on Capitol Hill with a BLinC student, campus ministry leaders and religious freedom attorneys. |
Other campus groups have felt the hot hand of anti-religious
discrimination on their necks. The Becket law firm reports:
"In
October 2017, the University of Iowa targeted Business Leaders in Christ (BLinC)
and kicked them off campus because BLinC asks its leaders to share its
religious beliefs—even though the university allows other groups to select
leaders who share their mission and ideology. Becket is defending BLinC in
federal court against the University of Iowa, asking the court to allow BLinC
back on campus.
"On
February 6, 2019, the court ruled that the university must end its unequal
treatment of religious student organizations, and allow BLinC permanently back
on campus. In light of continued official statements by the university that its
policies would continue to exclude religious student groups, BLinC appealed to
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit."
Professors also experience anti-religious targeting
Academic administrators intent on enforcing secular dogma do
not limit their targets to religious students; they also train their sights on faith-following
faculty.
Psychiatrist and professor Dr. Allan Josephson interviewed on
CMDA's Christian Doctors Digest and
also spoke
at the Heritage Foundation on gender issues—to the outrage of some of his
academic colleagues.
Walt Heyer, a man who for years identified as a woman, writes
in defense of Professor Josephson after his subsequent forced departure from the
University of Louisville:
"Dr.
Allan Josephson, the Division Chief of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and
Psychology at the University of Louisville, has served as a distinguished
professor in good standing for fifteen years. He scored perfect marks in 2014,
2015 and 2016 on his university reviews.
"But
all of that changed in 2017, when he was quickly demoted. This year, the
university did not renew Dr. Josephson’s contract, effectively firing him.
"Why?
All because a few of his colleagues disagreed with his views on treatment
protocols for gender dysphoria in children.
"I have heard Dr. Josephson speak. He is brilliant and likely
would destroy his former colleagues in an intellectual face-to-face debate
regarding the effectiveness and consequences of using affirmation, hormones,
and surgery as treatment for childhood gender distress.
"Looking
back on my life, I only wish Dr. Josephson would have been my doctor during my
childhood."
Faith community and government leaders fight
back
Reacting to the surge of anti-religious
discrimination on campuses and beyond, the faith-based community and key
political leaders are moving to protect freedoms of speech and religious
exercise on campuses.
On March 21, the President issued an executive order, the key parts of which are as follows:
Sec. 2. Policy. It is the
policy of the Federal Government to: (a)encourage institutions to foster environments that promote open, intellectually
engaging, and diverse debate, including through compliance with the First Amendment for public institutions
and compliance with stated institutional policies regarding freedom of speech
for private institutions.
Sec. 3. Improving Free Inquiry on Campus. (a) To advance the policy
described in subsection 2(a) of this order, the heads of covered agencies
shall, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget, take appropriate steps, in a manner consistent with applicable law, including the First Amendment, to ensure
institutions that receive Federal research or education grants promote free
inquiry, including through compliance with all applicable Federal laws,
regulations, and policies.
Sec. 6. General
Provisions. (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the
availability of appropriations.
While this executive order does not alter existing law or
Constitutional provisions, it does send a warning shot across the bow of
institutions that have denied students their First Amendment rights of speech,
religious exercise or assembly.
For academic administrators who fear the secular dogmatists but otherwise
might be inclined to protect these freedoms, it provides them with
"cover" to enforce freedom-protecting policies. For those who are not
inclined to protect these freedoms (like school administrators who have
discriminated against CMDA campus groups), the executive order should make them
think twice about pursuing their discriminatory intentions at the risk of
federal funding.
CMDA advocates for religious freedom
 |
| Education Secretary Betsy DeVos |
Having attended off-the-record meetings with high-level
Department of Justice officials and with Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, I can
assure readers that the administration views protecting campus religious freedom
as a priority concern. Secretary DeVos recently publicly announced
that the federal government "will no longer enforce a restriction
barring religious organizations from serving as contract providers of equitable
services solely due to their religious affiliation."
Buttressing that decision is a landmark Supreme Court case (one
of many
court cases in which CMDA has participated), Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer (137 S. Ct.
2012 (2017). The Court held in that
case that under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution, otherwise eligible recipients cannot be disqualified from a
public benefit just because of their faith commitments.
At the end of the day, specific laws and the Constitution--and
judges' interpretation of those--will determine the freedoms of faith-based student
groups. Thankfully, CMDA has built strong relationships over the years
with legal groups like
Alliance Defending Freedom, Becket, and Christian Legal Society and others that
gladly defend our campus groups and your religious freedoms.
Pray, speak out and prepare
What can you do?
Pray for the protection of our nation's historic
commitment to religious freedom; elect and support government officials
who will enforce protections; and speak out about instances of anti-religious
discrimination.
Speaking out about discrimination promotes justice and helps protect
others from discrimination. If you know of instances of discrimination against
faith-based student groups and/or health professionals, please visit our Freedom2Care discrimination stories
website to relate any incidents. (Alternatively, you may forward any stories
and related documentation to me at JI@Freedom2Care.org.)
We can help evaluate the situation and potential for legal counsel and/or
defense.
Might you as a student or professional face backlash for speaking
out? Count on it and prepare for it.
"You will be hated by all because of My name…"(Mark
13:13).
As believers preparing to stand firm in our faith convictions in
the face of inevitable attacks, we do well to model Daniel, who "made up
his mind that he would not defile himself" (Daniel 1:8) and Esther, who
vowed, "if I perish, I perish” (Esther 4:16).
We do not know exactly how our tests of faith may come. For an increasing
number of believers around the world, a test of faith means a literal gun
to the head by an anti-Christian terrorist demanding apostasy, or a radical government
edict targeting Christians. Others have faced more subtle yet still profound personal
tests of fealty to Christ and His Kingdom principles—in conversations,
interviews, patient encounters, investigations and legal actions.
However our tests come, may God grant us grace, courage and faithfulness
to always and forever remain true to Christ in all we are and in all we say and
do.
"But when they hand you over, do not worry about how or
what you are to say; for it will be given you in that hour what you are to say"
(Matthew 10:19).
"…but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved"(Mark
13:13).
"I will give to the one who
thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. He who overcomes will
inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son" (Revelation
21:6-7).
Resources:
No comments:
Post a Comment