TWU law school snub

[FiveParadox]

While yes, Trinity Western University is a private faith-based institution, the conferral of degrees is a power provided by the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia through the Degree Authorization Act. The province has an obligation to ensure that its statutory instruments are managed in a way that respects the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is clear that sexually-active LGBTQ* people are significantly disadvantaged in their ability to attend Trinity Western University. On this basis alone, there are reasonable grounds for the Law Society of Upper Canada to refuse to accredit Trinity Western University to issue law degrees.

The Honourable Amrik Virk M.L.A. (Surrey-Tynehead), the Minister of Advanced Education, has already approved the law degree proposed by Trinity Western University. I think it's tremendously likely, considering the push at the B.C. Law Society to overturn its board's decision, that the decision of the minister to approve the degree is going to be judicially reviewed (if not revoked by a future minister).

...which would render the entire discussion moot anyway.

 

[petros]

Is there three boxes on the school application?Male, female or LGBT?

 

[gerryh]

I guess the americans are more tolerant than Canada.

Jonathan Kay: Maybe TWU’s critics should take a look at U.S. Christian law schools | National Post

 

[BornRuff]

Is there three boxes on the school application?Male, female or LGBT?

So you think that LGBT is a gender?

 

[FiveParadox]

Is there three boxes on the school application?Male, female or LGBT?

What kind of confused, ignorant question is that?

 

[BornRuff]

To answer your question though, this is the agreement that people need to sign and live by in order to attend the school.

https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/twu-community-covenant-agreement.pdf

Part of it clearly states that "sexual intimacy is reserved for marriage between one man and one woman"

 

[gerryh]

Because they impose discriminatory policies on people who want to become lawyers.



Why is that ok with you, but you don't seem to think it is ok to say that the law society has the right to require that schools they accredit don't discriminate against prospective lawyers and if schools want to discriminate, they can try to get accredited somewhere else?



They are saying that people who are sexually active can be expelled from the school. They say that people who are gay have to effectively stop being gay if they want to attend. Beyond being discriminatory, it is just stupid. Why should anyone try to control what anyone else does in their bedroom?

They have a standard moral code that they require all to abide by. No discrimination. It is expected by everyone. Gay, straight, Bi, male, female, black, white or red.


I expect provincial and federal organizations that are non sectarian to be exactly that and not get involved in condemning or supporting any Faith based decisions. They should be looking at curriculum only. Does the school teach what is required and that is it.

 

[petros]

What kind of confused, ignorant question is that?

One for a confused ignorant person.

 

[gerryh]

T
Part of it clearly states that "sexual intimacy is reserved for marriage between one man and one woman"

That is correct. That is what their Bible states. It is a basic tenet of their Faith.

While yes, Trinity Western University is a private faith-based institution, the conferral of degrees is a power provided by the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia through the Degree Authorization Act. The province has an obligation to ensure that its statutory instruments are managed in a way that respects the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is clear that sexually-active LGBTQ* people are significantly disadvantaged in their ability to attend Trinity Western University. On this basis alone, there are reasonable grounds for the Law Society of Upper Canada to refuse to accredit Trinity Western University to issue law degrees.

The Honourable Amrik Virk M.L.A. (Surrey-Tynehead), the Minister of Advanced Education, has already approved the law degree proposed by Trinity Western University. I think it's tremendously likely, considering the push at the B.C. Law Society to overturn its board's decision, that the decision of the minister to approve the degree is going to be judicially reviewed (if not revoked by a future minister).

...which would render the entire discussion moot anyway.

Wrong, it is clear that ANY sexually active person is "disadvantaged". Their sexual preference is moot.

 

[petros]

The correct word for word quote is: to abstain from “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”
That would include adultery would it not?

 

[gerryh]

The correct word for word quote is: to abstain from “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”
That would include adultery would it not?

Yup, and premarital.

 

[BornRuff]

The correct word for word quote is: to abstain from “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”
That would include adultery would it not?

As it reads, it excludes all sexual activity other than sex between a man and a women who are married.

Why on earth should a school be involved in someone's sex life?

 

[petros]

There is nothing homosexual about adultery.

 

[BornRuff]

That is correct. That is what their Bible states. It is a basic tenet of their Faith.

Wrong, it is clear that ANY sexually active person is "disadvantaged". Their sexual preference is moot.

[/FONT]

Again, it is more than ok for them to believe whatever they want. The issue is forcing it on students.

There is nothing homosexual about adultery.

Lol, what in gods name( ) are you talking about? Why is that relevant?

 

[gerryh]

As it reads, it excludes all sexual activity other than sex between a man and a women who are married.

Why on earth should a school be involved in someone's sex life?

because it is a Faith Based Christian School. What kind of stupid question was that? We aren't talking about UBC or SFU. This School, since 1962, has always been a Faith based Christian School. It catered to Christians. Not atheists, or Muslims, or Jews, or Agnostics. Christians.

 

[BornRuff]

They have a standard moral code that they require all to abide by. No discrimination. It is expected by everyone. Gay, straight, Bi, male, female, black, white or red.


I expect provincial and federal organizations that are non sectarian to be exactly that and not get involved in condemning or supporting any Faith based decisions. They should be looking at curriculum only. Does the school teach what is required and that is it.

Your logic makes no sense. Rules implicitly apply to everyone. The problem is the rules specifically affect certain people.

The Law society is a self governing body of lawyers. Why would they have any less right to personal beliefs than this law school?

 

[petros]

Lol, what in gods name( ) are you talking about? Why is that relevant?

It's an activity that violates the sacredness of a marriage between a man and a woman.
Why does that confuse you? If a married person attends law school at WTU they can't practise law in ON because they signed a contract.

 

[BornRuff]

because it is a Faith Based Christian School. What kind of stupid question was that? We aren't talking about UBC or SFU. This School, since 1962, has always been a Faith based Christian School. It catered to Christians. Not atheists, or Muslims, or Jews, or Agnostics. Christians.

I really don't think this argument holds any weight. Just because some people believe something doesn't make it automatically ok.

You are obviously free to believe whatever you want, but when you translate that into actions, people are more than entitled to disagree with you.

Just like people at this school have beliefs about how things should be, so to do the people at the law society. Why are their beliefs any less valid than the people at this school?

 

[gerryh]

Your logic makes no sense. Rules implicitly apply to everyone. The problem is the rules specifically affect certain people.

No, they effect everyone that attends. Tell me how they effect some and not others.,

The Law society is a self governing body of lawyers. Why would they have any less right to personal beliefs than this law school?

Ahhhhhhh.... so the law society's personal beliefs trump the Christian Schools beliefs. Is that right?

 

[BornRuff]

It's an activity that violates the sacredness of a marriage between a man and a woman.
Why does that confuse you? If a married person attends law school at WTU they can't practise law in ON because they signed a contract.

Dear god. You are not even close to making sense. If you want me to respond, can you try to explain your point differently?