Americans United: Iowa Supreme CourtRulingOnMarriageUpholdsReligious Liberty, Says Americans United

Tue Apr 7 10:39:06 PDT 2009

I do.  Referring him to another counselor is clearly the best solution in terms of policy, and legally, the atheist should have the same protection as the believer.  They are both acting on a matter of conscience arising out of their views about religion. 

Quoting Steve Sanders <stevesan at umich.edu>:

> Let's say a student comes to a counselor in the same university clinical
> program and wants help understanding how religion might him better deal with
> his personal problems.  The counselor is an atheist and believes as a matter
> of conscience that religion does not play a valid role in helping people
> deal with their problems.  The counselor refers the student to another
> counselor.
>
> I predict that the Alliance Defense Fund would sue the school claiming that
> its counseling program was attempting to impose a certain (derogatory) view
> about religion, much as ADF recently (successfully) sued a university based
> on commentary about religious views toward homosexuality that appeared in
> student-created literature in the school's Safe Zone program.
>
> Do Rick and Doug agree that such a suit would be silly and that the
> common-sense, live-and-let-live ethic also ought to prevail in such a case?
>
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Steve Sanders
>
>
>  <http://www.mayerbrown.com/lawyers/profile.asp?hubbardid=S597744167[1]>
> Attorney, Supreme Court and appellate litigation practice group, Mayer Brown
> LLP, Chicago
>
> Co-editor,  <http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/lgbtlaw/[2]> Sexual Orientation
> and the Law Blog
>
> Adjunct faculty, University of Michigan Law School (Winter term 2010)
>
> Email:  <mailto:stevesan at umich.edu> stevesan at umich.edu
>
> Personal home page:  <http://www.stevesanders.net/[3]> www.stevesanders.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas Laycock
> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 9:24 AM
> To: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> Subject: RE: Americans United: Iowa Supreme
> CourtRulingOnMarriageUpholdsReligious Liberty, Says Americans United
>
>
>
> Clarification:  This was a student at Eastern Michigan University.  Michigan
> State University had a rough night last night against Carolina, but it had
> nothing to do with discriminating against Ms. Ward.
>
> This issue was litigated a few years ago in the Social Work Department at
> Southwest Missouri State, and if I recall, ended in a big settlement for the
> student.  These cases are clear examples where live and let live yields an
> obvious solution -- refer the gay counselee to a counselor who can actually
> help him and will have no conflict with conscience -- and ideologues on one
> side or the other reject live and let live and seek either coercively
> imposed thought reform or explusion from the program.
>
> Quoting Rick Duncan <nebraskalawprof at yahoo.com>:
>
>> Here is another example--from the Religion Clause blog-- of the
>> inevitable conflict between gay rights and religious liberty:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Former Student Challenges University's Requirements for Counseling
> Practicum
>>
>>
>>
>> Last week, a former graduate student at Michigan State University
>> filed suit in a Michigan federal district court alleging that she was
>> unconstitutionally dismissed from the University's graduate Counselling
>> Program solely because her religious beliefs and expression regarding
>> homosexual behavior contradicted those of the University's counseling
>> department. Ward believes that homosexual behavior is immoral and can
>> be changed. In Ward v. Members of the Board of Control of Eastern
>> Michigan University, (ED MI, filed 4/2/2009) (full text of complaint),
>> Julea Ward alleged that disciplinary proceedings were brought against
>> her because in her Counseling Practicum course she referred a
>> homosexual client to another counsellor rather than affirm and validate
>> the client's homosexual conduct. She was told that to remain in the
>> program she would need to undergo a "remediation" program to "see the
>> error of her ways" and change her "belief system" on homosexual
>> conduct. Alliance Defense Fund issued a release
>> announcing the filing of the lawsuit. The University today refused
>> specific comment, but said that it is a "diverse campus with a strong
>> commitment not to discriminate on the basis of gender, race,
>> disability, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity or
>> expression." (Ann Arbor News.)
>>
>>
>> Another is what public schools teach impressionable children about
>> marriage and human sexuality in states where the law affirms the
>> goodness of homosexual marriages and relationships. The law is a
>> seminar and the public school curricula, which is taught to all our
>> children, will reflect what the law teaches about marriage and sexual
>> orientation.
>>
>> Again, school vouchers would allow parents to opt out of the "common"
>> curriculum and avoid the inevitable conflict that arises when one
>> side of the culture war gets to teach the other side's children what
>> is the true, the good and the beautiful.
>>
>> Cheers, Rick Duncan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Douglas Laycock
> Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
> University of Michigan Law School
> 625 S. State St.
> Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
>   734-647-9713
>
>

Douglas Laycock
Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
  734-647-9713

Links:
------
[1] http://www.mayerbrown.com/lawyers/profile.asp?hubbardid=S597744167
[2] http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/lgbtlaw/
[3] http://www.stevesanders.net/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20090407/92ecd80e/attachment.htm>