Court Upholds Expulsion of Counseling Student Who Opposes Homosexuality

[Roadie]

FOXNews.com - Court Upholds Expulsion of Counseling Student Who Opposes Homosexuality

A federal judge has ruled in favor of a public university that removed a Christian student from its graduate program in school counseling over her belief that homosexuality is morally wrong. Monday's ruling, according to Julea Ward's attorneys, could result in Christian students across the country being expelled from public university for similar views.
“It’s a very dangerous precedent,” Jeremy Tedesco, legal counsel for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund, told FOX News Radio. “The ruling doesn’t say that explicitly, but that’s what is going to happen.”
U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh dismissed Ward’s lawsuit against Eastern Michigan University. She was removed from the school’s counseling program last year because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.


Ward’s attorneys claim the university told her she would only be allowed to remain in the program if she went through a “remediation” program so that she could “see the error of her ways” and change her belief system about homosexuality. (more at source)

The college said she violated the "American Counseling Association code of ethics.", yet, in a simple Google search I easily found Counselors specializing in Gay and Lesbian clients...

So, to me, this ruling sets the precedent against Christian based Counselors...

Am I missing something here, or is this a complete and utter, double standard?

 

[Archbishop]

Wow! That's crazy! I definitely want to hear more about this.

 

[Roadie]

Wow! That's crazy! I definitely want to hear more about this.

Indeed.

The whole "send her to remediation so she can be more tolerant" thing really made me shudder...

 

[Liberty's Teeth]

Please step into the boxcar Mr./Mrs. Christian. We are taking you to your sensitivity and diversity training.

 

[Roadie]

Please step into the boxcar Mr./Mrs. Christian. We are taking you to your sensitivity and diversity training.

OK, so I am not the only one that felt that way reading the article!

 

[christman]

So, to me, this ruling sets the precedent against Christian based Counselors...

Am I missing something here, or is this a complete and utter, double standard?

Good point. How can you become a Christian based counselor that is nationally accredited if they do not allow it? Is it a State school? Or private?

 

[sadclownwp]

thats the most retarded ruling i have heard about in like 3 weeks. I'm sorry I thought this was America, land of the free and home of the brave. Seems this student was being free in her beliefs and brave enough to stand for them. God I hope that I never have kids. I don't think I could raise them the right way without being thrown in jail or being sent to some sort of a death camp of tolerance.

 

[Bapak2ja]

A key consideration here is the judge. Clearly, it is a liberal federal judge. There is hope that the appeal will reach the Supreme Court and gain a different verdict. Since the issue is also being address at a school in Georgia, there is a good chance the SCOTUSA will hear arguments.

 

[$mooth]

She wasn't expelled for being Christian or opposing Homosexuals. She was expelled for refusing to see patients that didn't fit the ones like herself. I Don't think that's a problem. Would she be expelled if she refused to see Asian patients? probably. Her beliefs arent the problem.
Sam goes for Christian MDs. Do you mind if they refuse to treat you because you're Catholic/Jewish/Protestan or White/Brown/Green/Purple or straight/gay/whatever?

 

[Roadie]

She wasn't expelled for being Christian or opposing Homosexuals. She was expelled for refusing to see patients that didn't fit the ones like herself. I Don't think that's a problem. Would she be expelled if she refused to see Asian patients? probably. Her beliefs arent the problem.
Sam goes for Christian MDs. Do you mind if they refuse to treat you because you're Catholic/Jewish/Protestan or White/Brown/Green/Purple or straight/gay/whatever?

..but it it OK for a Counselor to see only gay patients?

So I guess then you would be against say, a Christian Pastor refusing to marry gay, Muslim, Jewish, etc couples?

Sorry, if WalMart has the "right to refuse service to anyone" then why wouldn't a Christian Counselor, etc have the same right?

 

[LPMan59]

Sorry, if WalMart has the "right to refuse service to anyone" then why wouldn't a Christian Counselor, etc have the same right?

but they really don't and we all know they don't. i think as a counselor she should have done the Christian thing and lent a hand to those who are in need, regardless of their lifestyle.

Just to play devil's advocate (and I mean no disrespect and am not trying to pick a fight):

Could you imagine her being a public school guidance counselor and how she would act if approached by a student who was sexually confused, being bullied for being gay, etc? Would you be ok with her ignoring that child's cry for help?

 

[$mooth]

..but it it OK for a Counselor to see only gay patients?

So I guess then you would be against say, a Christian Pastor refusing to marry gay, Muslim, Jewish, etc couples?

Sorry, if WalMart has the "right to refuse service to anyone" then why wouldn't a Christian Counselor, etc have the same right?

Well, I'm not completely against you here. I think the difference is subtle.

First, Walmart doesn't have the right to refuse service to anyone. They may claim that, but it's not true. Goes back to federal rulings on interstate commerce that you can't refuse service based on race, creed, etc, etc.

I think when practicing, she should have the right to refuse to see whoever she wants, just like a practicing councelor can only see gay patients. But when it's part of a school, that's their choice, not her's. If in undergraduate I told the school I don't plan on becomming a writer so I don't need to take Freshman Composition, they would've sent me packing.

A pastor is practicing. It gets to be a slimey grey area, but I'm with you that they should be able to have conditions. But technically, they are not selling a product (i know they sorta are, but technically...) To deviate, Its also why i think marriage should be a church thing, not a gov't thing. I got married under God, not under the state of Texas.

 

[ak keep the second]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redrtess of grievances.

Freedom of religion, free exercise thereof!!!! Whats not clear about that, if the woman has a religious conviction about homosexuals, there are plenty of other counselers who will see them. Why is this acceptance of everyone no matter how you've been raised or your religious beliefs being accepted as correct? What happend to believing some things are RIGHT and some are WRONG!

 

[ak keep the second]

but they really don't and we all know they don't. i think as a counselor she should have done the Christian thing and lent a hand to those who are in need, regardless of their lifestyle.

Just to play devil's advocate (and I mean no disrespect and am not trying to pick a fight):

Could you imagine her being a public school guidance counselor and how she would act if approached by a student who was sexually confused, being bullied for being gay, etc? Would you be ok with her ignoring that child's cry for help?

I agree with you it would be the "Christian" thing to, she should do her best to help them. I personally dont agree with her stance to not see them, but i think she should have the choice to if she wants. Who is the government to make a ruling telling her who she has to see?

 

[$mooth]

I agree with you it would be the "Christian" thing to, she should do her best to help them. I personally dont agree with her stance to not see them, but i think she should have the choice to if she wants. Who is the government to make a ruling telling her who she has to see?

Since my wife is currently in Med School, i know many of the students. Do you think it would pass that a Hindu student refused to do a rotation at St. Vincents because it was a "Christian" hospital? I think the school has rights too. They need to be able to set their requirements and if you don't agree, go to school elsewhere.

Once this young lady has graduated, then you're spot on. The gov't should not tell her who she has to see.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Well, I'm not completely against you here. I think the difference is subtle.

First, Walmart doesn't have the right to refuse service to anyone. They may claim that, but it's not true. Goes back to federal rulings on interstate commerce that you can't refuse service based on race, creed, etc, etc.

I think when practicing, she should have the right to refuse to see whoever she wants, just like a practicing councelor can only see gay patients. But when it's part of a school, that's their choice, not her's. If in undergraduate I told the school I don't plan on becomming a writer so I don't need to take Freshman Composition, they would've sent me packing.

A pastor is practicing. It gets to be a slimey grey area, but I'm with you that they should be able to have conditions. But technically, they are not selling a product (i know they sorta are, but technically...) To deviate, Its also why i think marriage should be a church thing, not a gov't thing. I got married under God, not under the state of Texas.

Let's go back to the whole "remediation counseling" thing. That wasn't neutral that was "pro-gay" bias. Someone brought up the strawman argument of a Hindu doctor refusing to practice at a Christian-named hospital. First of all, hospitals hire doctors, not the other way around, so if a doctor has a problem with a "Christian" hospital, he doesn't have to apply there. Secondly, a doctor (presumably) has seen a "higher calling" and takes an oath to "first do no harm". That being the case, his first priority (after making his medical school student loan payments) is more concerned about the person than the religion, race or creed.

While a Christian might be able to counsel a homosexual, religious conviction might lead him to counsel the homosexual in ways that would be difficult for the counselee to accept. It seems obvious to me that the purposeful effect of the school's mandate to the student was to force her to renounce her beliefs or be expelled. That's a violation of her First Amendment rights.

 

[Expat]

Okay, I am a Christian Counsellor. I believe homosexuality is an abomination to God. Why am I forced to go against my Christian values to counsel the person and make them feel better about themselves. Once again we are good at the separation of church and state but really weak on the free exercise of religion part.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Okay, I am a Christian Counsellor. I believe homosexuality is an abomination to God. Why am I forced to go against my Christian values to counsel the person and make them feel better about themselves. Once again we are good at the separation of church and state but really weak on the free exercise of religion part.

egggggggggzakly!!! If part of the 1st Amendment is inalienable, then all of it is inalienable. If the 10th Amendment is in force, then the other (first)9 should be, as well. We are gradually being pushed out of society and what is going to take the place of the Judeo-Christian values upon which the nation was founded? Looks like Shariah is stealthing its way into the culture.

 

[Expat]

egggggggggzakly!!! If part of the 1st Amendment is inalienable, then all of it is inalienable. If the 10th Amendment is in force, then the other (first)9 should be, as well. We are gradually being pushed out of society and what is going to take the place of the Judeo-Christian values upon which the nation was founded? Looks like Shariah is stealthing its way into the culture.

Except if we do end up with Sharia law one of these days, the libs will recall fondly the repressiveness of the Judeo-Christians values that were once forced upon them.

 

[$mooth]

Let's go back to the whole "remediation counseling" thing. That wasn't neutral that was "pro-gay" bias. Someone brought up the strawman argument of a Hindu doctor refusing to practice at a Christian-named hospital. First of all, hospitals hire doctors, not the other way around, so if a doctor has a problem with a "Christian" hospital, he doesn't have to apply there. Secondly, a doctor (presumably) has seen a "higher calling" and takes an oath to "first do no harm". That being the case, his first priority (after making his medical school student loan payments) is more concerned about the person than the religion, race or creed.

If you're going to call it a strawman argument, get it right. I didn't say Doctor, I said med-student. This girl is a student, and therefore has to meet the school's curriculum.

I agree with your point on the "remediation counseling" thing. It seems pretty bogus to me, but that's what her lawyer's are claiming. I never saw it from the school or what it really is. It might be something benign like going over school policy and curriculum, not a anti-anti-gay conseling. It's hard to trust one lawyer when being reported through fox.
If it is what it sounds like, then they're full of