TWU law school snub

[FiveParadox]

No, it doesn't. But you go ahead and twist it to fit your agenda.[/FONT]

It doesn't what?

Trinity Western University's policies don't forbid openly gay or lesbian students from being themselves? They do, though. See page 296 of the General University Policies for Trinity Western University. "Refrain from practices which are contrary to biblical teachings. These include, but are not limited to...homosexual behaviour."

 

[BornRuff]

You fall way short of any real argument with the whole 'black' thing. Anyone can attend TWU. A student is not required to be white, christian, straight or a virgin. No such rules exist there. They simply have to agree that a requirement to attend is to abstain from pre-marital sex.

and any sex other than sex between a man and a woman regardless of if they are married.

The law society's only legitimate concern with the school is whether the curriculum and standards of learning are meeting the requirements set forth to receive a law degree and attempt the bar exam. They do not govern the ethics of schools, they govern the ethics of lawyers and there is a big difference there. Apparently they have trouble governing their own discrimination which may explain why we all think how we do of lawyers.

The ethics of the law school are obviously something taken into consideration when determining accreditation.

It is not hard to imagine that the ethical environment that they spend 3 years training in will influence their ethical standards on the job as well.

When determining if a lawyer is suitable to be admitted to the bar, literally anything and everything they have ever done can come into question in determining if they have suitable character.

On may occasions here I have expressed my absolute disdain for all religion. I find it to be complete codswallop and nothing more than preying on the minds of the weak who need some supreme reason for our existence. That said I do think most religions espouse at least some good morals and if people are nicer to each other and live a more ethical life because of their beliefs, no matter how crazy I personally find them, then there is some good from it. Why an association that is supposed to set unimpeachable standards of ethics would decry the lofty standards set by a school is not easy to fathom unless the parties in control of the law society have a bias against the religion because it promotes good moral fiber and that is actually discrimination under the Charter.

This is stupid. Their concern is very clear. They don't care that they are christian, they care that they discriminate against people.

On a separate note....I am quite familiar with TWU in Langley. I know people who went there. I know people who partied their faces off and screwed like rabbits while attending I even have personal knowledge of a lesbian graduate. Having this clause in the student contract does not guarantee adherence.

Of course, but it is certainly not acceptable for the law society to accredit a program under that assumption that students will have to lie to get through it.

Exactly! If they don't like the standards at one school they can attend another. If they disagree with the policy against illegal drugs at UBC they can try to find one without such a rule or they can agree to be bound by it and attend UBC.

If the law society doesn't like the standards at a school, they can't accredit them.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Any Christian can practice law in Ontario if they have been called to the bar as a graduate of an accredited law school. The Law Society of Upper Canada has not refused accreditation to Trinity Western University because it is a Christian university, but because it is a post-secondary institution that has established rules that forbid students who are openly gay or lesbian from being themselves... and this is an entirely reasonable position for these law societies.

I have to disagree. It is not the place of the law society to govern the rules of any school. It only has a legitimate concern with the academic soundness of the institution to provide the required curriculum set forth to obtain a law degree and pass the bar exam. No association of professionals or trades is allowed to do anything but consider the academic requirements for entry or its own code of ethics.

TWU is also a PRIVATE institution which gives latitude to the rules they may have. If they were the only law school available then their policy would be struck down upon the first Charter challenge by a homosexual but there are many other schools available to those openly gay who wish to pursue law as a career.

One should also consider that NO students have brought this forward to challenge under the Charter. Why? Because TWU is not really recognized as a great hall of legal learning. What it is recognized as is a Christian school where Christian values are a major and integral part of campus life. That is why students apply there, because they wish to have this Christian influence as part of their life and school and not because a law degree from TWU is highly prestigious in the legal community. If a student wants a degree that comes with mystical prestige they go to Harvard or SFU, not TWU.

 

[gerryh]

It doesn't what?

Trinity Western University's policies don't forbid openly gay or lesbian students from being themselves? They do, though. See page 296 of the General University Policies for Trinity Western University. "Refrain from practices which are contrary to biblical teachings. These include, but are not limited to...homosexual behaviour."

and vanilla's aren't allowed to fu ck either. Or do you prefer the term "breeders"?

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

It doesn't what?

Trinity Western University's policies don't forbid openly gay or lesbian students from being themselves? They do, though. See page 296 of the General University Policies for Trinity Western University. "Refrain from practices which are contrary to biblical teachings. These include, but are not limited to...homosexual behaviour."

Chris I noticed you passed over my post so I'll post it again.

Christian Lawyers. Are you suggesting that they cannot compartmentalize their belief when practicing law. Or would it be that the Law Society of Upper Canada is discriminating against a group and trying to jam its secular belief system down the throats of all school that produce lawyers.

This stinks just as much as the CHARTER OF VALUES. Not everyone subscribes to the same belief system.

Lawyers deal with murderers, pedophiles, thieves, rapists, and defend such criminals before the courts and are able to compartmentalize that. So to suggest that someone that subscribes to a religion cannot do the same is discriminatory and arrogant to say the least.

 

[BornRuff]

I have to disagree. It is not the place of the law society to govern the rules of any school. It only has a legitimate concern with the academic soundness of the institution to provide the required curriculum set forth to obtain a law degree and pass the bar exam. No association of professionals or trades is allowed to do anything but consider the academic requirements for entry or its own code of ethics.

This is just wrong. Pretty much every professional organization is involved in accrediting schools. It is obviously an issue if the schools are doing thing contrary to the mission of the professional organization.

TWU is also a PRIVATE institution which gives latitude to the rules they may have. If they were the only law school available then their policy would be struck down upon the first Charter challenge by a homosexual but there are many other schools available to those openly gay who wish to pursue law as a career.

One should also consider that NO students have brought this forward to challenge under the Charter. Why? Because TWU is not really recognized as a great hall of legal learning. What it is recognized as is a Christian school where Christian values are a major and integral part of campus life. That is why students apply there, because they wish to have this Christian influence as part of their life and school and not because a law degree from TWU is highly prestigious in the legal community. If a student wants a degree that comes with mystical prestige they go to Harvard or SFU, not TWU.

They have some latitude, but it doesn't mean everyone else has to follow along. The law societies also have latitude. The law societies explicitly exist to set the standards for how to become a lawyer. If a school wants its students to be able to practice law, they need to work with these societies.

 

[PoliticalNick]

and any sex other than sex between a man and a woman regardless of if they are married.



The ethics of the law school are obviously something taken into consideration when determining accreditation.

It is not hard to imagine that the ethical environment that they spend 3 years training in will influence their ethical standards on the job as well.

When determining if a lawyer is suitable to be admitted to the bar, literally anything and everything they have ever done can come into question in determining if they have suitable character.



This is stupid. Their concern is very clear. They don't care that they are christian, they care that they discriminate against people.



Of course, but it is certainly not acceptable for the law society to accredit a program under that assumption that students will have to lie to get through it.



If the law society doesn't like the standards at a school, they can't accredit them.

None of these arguments matter. It is not the place of the law society to accredit any school. That is the role of the federal and provincial ministries of education. What the law society is doing is not recognizing a legally accredited school based upon something each attending student freely agrees to. That is where this case will be lost.

Personally I agree with same-sex marriage and that all the legal rights of marriage go with it. I am actually going to England in October to see my cousin marry her girlfriend of 34 years so do not think I agree with the christian standard in any way. What I do agree with though is that as a private institution following the correct curriculum and accredited by the ministries of education both provincially and federally can set for a code of conduct that is acceptable to both the institution and the students. As no student has yet challenged this (they would lose anyway as it is a private institution) it becomes obvious they all accept this and I would argue based upon the fact they choose to attend because of the Christian values, not in spite of them that the students support this rule.

 

[BornRuff]

Chris I noticed you passed over my post so I'll post it again.

Christian Lawyers. [/FONT]Are you suggesting that they cannot compartmentalize their belief when practicing law. Or would it be that the Law Society of Upper Canada is discriminating against a group and trying to jam its secular belief system down the throats of all school that produce lawyers.

This stinks just as much as the CHARTER OF VALUES. Not everyone subscribes to the same belief system.

Lawyers deal with murderers, pedophiles, thieves, rapists, and defend such criminals before the courts and are able to compartmentalize that. So to suggest that someone that subscribes to a religion cannot do the same is discriminatory and arrogant to say the least.

This is just way off the point of the entire thread. The law society didn't reject their application because they were Christian. There are undoubtedly thousands of lawyers in Ontario who are practicing Christians. The problem is them imposing discriminatory policies on their students.

None of these arguments matter. It is not the place of the law society to accredit any school.

Actually, that is exactly what their role is.

 

[petros]

It's not imposed. It's voluntary and it's the FLCA's job when it comes to accreditation.

 

[BornRuff]

It's not imposed. It's voluntary and it's the FLCA's job when it comes to accreditation.

What happens if they refuse to sign it?

Are you guys really going to keep arguing that Law Societies don't accredit law schools? That is so basic and easily proven, even directly in the OP.

 

[FiveParadox]

I have to disagree. It is not the place of the law society to govern the rules of any school. It only has a legitimate concern with the academic soundness of the institution to provide the required curriculum set forth to obtain a law degree and pass the bar exam. No association of professionals or trades is allowed to do anything but consider the academic requirements for entry or its own code of ethics.

While the academic merits of a law degree are a key topic of concern for the Law Society of Upper Canada's convocation (the society's decision-making body), convocation must also ensure that the accreditation of a law program would not be adverse to the "public interest." I would argue, quite vehemently, that the endorsement of a post-secondary institution which has a mandatory covenant forbidding homosexual behaviour, is clearly adverse to the "public interest."

TWU is also a PRIVATE institution which gives latitude to the rules they may have. If they were the only law school available then their policy would be struck down upon the first Charter challenge by a homosexual but there are many other schools available to those openly gay who wish to pursue law as a career.

It is a private institution, yes, but it receives its authority to confer degrees from the discretion of the Ministry of Advanced Education, and the recognition of its law program is subject to the discretion of the appropriate law societies. As was stated at the April 10 meeting of convocation at which this was first discussed in public session, the academic side is only one facet of the decision.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

This is just way off the point of the entire thread. The law society didn't reject their application because they were Christian. There are undoubtedly thousands of lawyers in Ontario who are practicing Christians. The problem is them imposing discriminatory policies on their students.
Actually, that is exactly what their role is.

It is exactly on point. If the law society was penalizing this school regarding their teachings in law I could understand, but they are targeting them specifically because they are a religious school who has asked their students to observe the religious doctrine. I know that's hard to understand, but if you think about it, it really isn't.

This has nothing to do with their (TWU) curriculum and everything to do with discrimination. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell one group its okay to do this and another its not. This is a free country and whether some like it or not we aren't all going to march to the same tune.

Some people have religious beliefs and want to be educated in a school like this. Sh!t, some people home school and that is bloody recognized as long as you pass your damned exams.

I'm not even religious and I get that.

While the academic merits of a law degree are a key topic of concern for the Law Society of Upper Canada's convocation (the society's decision-making body), convocation must also ensure that the accreditation of a law program would not be adverse to the "public interest." I would argue, quite vehemently, that the endorsement of a post-secondary institution which has a mandatory covenant forbidding homosexual behaviour, is clearly adverse to the "public interest."


It is a private institution, yes, but it receives its authority to confer degrees from the discretion of the Ministry of Advanced Education, and the recognition of its law program is subject to the discretion of the appropriate law societies. As was stated at the April 10 meeting of convocation at which this was first discussed in public session, the academic side is only one facet of the decision.

So you have me on ignore Chris?

 

[petros]

For Mr. One Ply.....

In keeping with biblical and TWU ideals, community members voluntarily abstain from the following actions

communication that is destructive to TWU community life and inter–personal relationships, including gossip, slander, vulgar/obscene language, and prejudice
harassment or any form of verbal or physical intimidation, including hazing
lying, cheating, or other forms of dishonesty including plagiarism
stealing, misusing or destroying property belonging to others
sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman
the use of materials that are degrading, dehumanizing, exploitive, hateful, or gratuitously violent, including, but not limited to pornography
drunkenness, under-age consumption of alcohol, the use or possession of illegal drugs, and the misuse or abuse of substances including prescribed drugs
the use or possession of alcohol on campus, or at any TWU sponsored event, and the use of tobacco on campus or at any TWU sponsored event.

What happens if they refuse to sign it?

Are you guys really going to keep arguing that Law Societies don't accredit law schools? That is so basic and easily proven, even directly in the OP.

FLCA sets the national standard.

Why on earth would you expect repercussions after making the PLEDGE, not contract.

Pledges aren't legal unless the two parties pinkie swear.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

For Mr. One Ply.....

In keeping with biblical and TWU ideals, community members vountarily abstain from the following actions

communication that is destructive to TWU community life and inter–personal relationships, including gossip, slander, vulgar/obscene language, and prejudice
harassment or any form of verbal or physical intimidation, including hazing
lying, cheating, or other forms of dishonesty including plagiarism
stealing, misusing or destroying property belonging to others
sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman
the use of materials that are degrading, dehumanizing, exploitive, hateful, or gratuitously violent, including, but not limited to pornography
drunkenness, under-age consumption of alcohol, the use or possession of illegal drugs, and the misuse or abuse of substances including prescribed drugs
the use or possession of alcohol on campus, or at any TWU sponsored event, and the use of tobacco on campus or at any TWU sponsored event.

You missed an "l".

 

[FiveParadox]

Chris I noticed you passed over my post so I'll post it again.

Christian Lawyers. [/FONT]Are you suggesting that they cannot compartmentalize their belief when practicing law. Or would it be that the Law Society of Upper Canada is discriminating against a group and trying to jam its secular belief system down the throats of all school that produce lawyers.

This stinks just as much as the CHARTER OF VALUES. Not everyone subscribes to the same belief system.

Lawyers deal with murderers, pedophiles, thieves, rapists, and defend such criminals before the courts and are able to compartmentalize that. So to suggest that someone that subscribes to a religion cannot do the same is discriminatory and arrogant to say the least.

I didn't realize you wanted a response from me.

I am sure that they could. This is not about licensing an individual barrister. The licensing process is a separate decision-making process administered pursuant to Bylaw 4(7) of the Law Society of Upper Canada (at least with respect to Ontario). If issues arose with an individual prospective lawyer's incapacity to "compartmentalize" and to perform their duties fairly and appropriately, I am sure that the society would raise those concerns at that time.

 

[petros]

Oh welll.

 

[BornRuff]

For Mr. One Ply.....

Again, what happens if they refuse to sign it?

What can happen to them if they break the covenant?

 

[petros]

Again, what happens if they refuse to sign it?

What can happen to them if they break the covenant?

Nothing. I posted a direct link. Read it yourself.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

I didn't realize you wanted a response from me.

I am sure that they could. This is not about licensing an individual barrister. The licensing process is a separate decision-making process administered pursuant to Bylaw 4(7) of the Law Society of Upper Canada (at least with respect to Ontario). If issues arose with an individual prospective lawyer's incapacity to "compartmentalize" and to perform their duties fairly and appropriately, I am sure that the society would raise those concerns at that time.

But we are talking about targeting a school based on its so called freedom. In this case freedom of religion.

Just because a private religious school does not recognize LGBT issues, or asks its students to observe religious doctrine, does not mean that it should be discriminated against.

I'm sorry my friend, but if we are to use the same tactics that we have had used against us then we have become our enemy.

This is zealous discrimination.

And you know where I come down on LGBT rights.

 

[petros]

In case the amazingly thick for being one ply BumFluff can't find it.....

Once a commitment has been indicated through signature, failure to respect the Community Covenant is a breach of personal integrity, a matter which may, in some cases, be of greater concern than the violation itself.