Changing a few words in their covenant so that it doesn't explicitly target homosexuality would burn the school to the ground?
TWU law school snub
- Thread starter gerryh
- Start date
Changing a few words in their covenant so that it doesn't explicitly target homosexuality would burn the school to the ground?
Been addressed by Gerryh, but the individuals rights and religion take a back seat to the zealots agenda.
This is about the students, who don't exist in the first place. For that matter though, when you are trying to enter a profession, you don't get to make up your own process for how to get there. There is no entrenched right to religious professional education.
This is about the the law society not wanting to associate itself with a school that has explicitly homophobic rules. This can be sorted out really really easily.
What rights? Where is homophobic law school protected as a right?
Why so vehement about the homosexual thing BR? Are you gay and want to go to TWU? Is it your son or daughter? It is a faith-based school that provides a faith-based environment for its students and that is why people choose to go there. This isn't Iran where they are forced to attend religious schools, it is a personal choice made by a student to have an environment where there values are represented. What's the problem with that?
again, it doesn't target homosexuality explicitly. It targets any sexual conduct outside biblical marriage. That includes a hell of a lot more than just homosexuality. But then, there seem to be many that consider homosexuality to be the be all and end all of humanity. It is THE most important thing in everyones lives.
Lol, you are asking why I am talking about rules against homosexuality in a thread explicitly about homophobic policies at a law school?
They are trying to be accepted as a professional school. The professionals they are trying to associate themselves with have a right to determine how people join their ranks. It is perfectly understandable that they wouldn't want to endorse a homophobic law program.
I'll take my sex the biblical way please.....I like women! What anybody else chooses to enjoy is up to them as long as all are consenting adults.
No, they're not.
They're discriminating based on the post-secondary institution that they chose to attend, which, quite apparently, does not meet the standards of the Law Society of Upper Canada for what it takes to be accredited. A student could be a Christian and attend any number of post-secondary institutions that do not discriminate against the LGBTQ* community.
Of course other things are included in that, but it explicitly bans all forms of homosexual acts.
I don't know what the hell you are getting at in the last two sentences. All people should be treated equally. You will hear more about homosexuals if you are involved in anything that explicitly restricts homosexuality.
If you want to hear more about puppies or hockey players, start discriminating against them.
Not according to the covenant that people have to sign if they want to attend this law school.
The law program isn't homophobic. The program will have to provide the correct curriculum to be able to give a degree. There will be courses on Charter law which will include same-sex rights and discrimination. As in any law school they will be taught the difference between laws and their personal opinions and taught how to represent clients based solely upon the law and not their personal belief system. I personally find it admirable that TWU wants to offer this program that in many ways is in direct conflict with the views of the church at this time. You seem to have some adamant belief the students will be brainwashed into subverting the law for the benefit of ancient religious dogma.
So, it turns out that over 1,300 members of the British Columbia Law Society (over 10% of the current and retired lawyers forming its membership) have requested a special general meeting of the society, which must now take place by June 22, 2014. The reason that the meeting has been ordered: A motion to reverse the benchers' decision to accredit Trinity Western University to issue law degrees.
The resolution would not be binding on the benchers; however, if they fail to substantially implement the general meeting's decision, then the members can order a referendum which, if passed, would be binding on the B.C. Law Society (and would, if successful, revoke the accreditation of Trinity Western University's law school).
Source: The Globe & Mail
The resolution would not be binding on the benchers; however, if they fail to substantially implement the general meeting's decision, then the members can order a referendum which, if passed, would be binding on the B.C. Law Society (and would, if successful, revoke the accreditation of Trinity Western University's law school).
Source: The Globe & Mail
It is a bit problematic to try to teach students about human rights law in an environment that claims to be exempt from said law and blatantly acting in contravention of said laws. Not exactly the best example, and the law society is pretty big on holding themselves to very loft ideals. Regardless, it isn't about the students who don't actually exist.
This is about you guys wanting to force a professional organization to endorse a program that they disagree with. If TWU has the right to be homophobic, why doesn't the law society have a choice in regards to whether or not they support that?
Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains guaranteed equality rights. As part of the Constitution, the section prohibits certain forms of discrimination perpetrated by the governments of Canada with the exception of ameliorative programs (affirmative action) and rights or privileges guaranteed by or under the Constitution of Canada in respect of denominational, separate or dissentient schools (religious education).
Rights under section 15 include racial equality, sexual equality, mental disability, and physical disability. In its jurisprudence, it has also been a source of gay rights in Canada. These rights are guaranteed to "Every individual," that is, every natural person. This wording excludes "legal persons" such as corporations, contrasting other sections that use the word "everyone," where "legal persons" were meant to be included. Section 15 has been in force since 1985
Rights under section 15 include racial equality, sexual equality, mental disability, and physical disability. In its jurisprudence, it has also been a source of gay rights in Canada. These rights are guaranteed to "Every individual," that is, every natural person. This wording excludes "legal persons" such as corporations, contrasting other sections that use the word "everyone," where "legal persons" were meant to be included. Section 15 has been in force since 1985
I'm not sure what I would think of the procedure. It would create considerable uncertainty for students who might be planning a transition plan to Trinity Western University's law school, at the moment, if the resolution at the general meeting is adopted. It would likely be very persuasive to the benchers, but they would have a year to determine whether or not to act upon the members' resolution.
If the benchers decided not to act, and the members ordered a referendum, that would potentially extend the timeline for a definitive decision (i.e., the referendum vote) to the end of 2015. By that time, applications to the law school from B.C. residents may already have started. It's an interesting situation, in terms of ensuring that there is fairness to the students involved.
That being said, would I be happy if the B.C. Law Society decided to revoke accreditation to Trinity Western University, as a post-secondary institution that — as a matter of policy — discriminates against diverse sexualities in its admission even to its non-religious academic degree programs? Yes, I would be happy, absolutely.
Ok... so you have copy and pasted the entire first two paragraphs from the wikipedia article on section 15. The next step would be to explain why.
Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
...really? The provision in the Community Covenant which forbids sexual intimacy outside of a heterosexual marriage discriminates against anyone who is not heterosexual. I would think that this has been made abundantly clear by this point in the conversation.