Court Rules In Favor Of Christian Counseling Student That Was Expelled For Her Beliefs
-
A small victory in the conflict between the gay rights political agenda and religious freedom. The Sixth Circuit has overturned an earlier decision that allowed a university to expel a Christian student for her beliefs. From One News Now:
The Sixth Circuit has ruled in favor of Christian graduate student Julea Ward, who almost three years ago was expelled from a university counseling program for her religious beliefs.
In a strongly worded opinion earlier today, the Sixth U.S. Circuit of Appeals reversed a district court decision in favor of Eastern Michigan University, sending it back for trial along with this message: “A reasonable jury could conclude that Ward’s professors ejected her from the counseling program because of hostility toward her speech and faith ….”
Julea Ward (Eastern Mich. Univ.)As part of her counseling practicum course in early 2009, Ward had been assigned a potential client who was homosexual and was seeking affirmation of that sexual orientation. Because she was unwilling to violate her own religious beliefs in the context of the counseling relationship, Ward was permitted to refer the client to another counselor — but was told to remain in the counseling program she would have to undergo a “remediation” program that would help her “see the error of her ways.”
When Ward refused, a faculty committee dismissed her from the program. In her subsequent lawsuit, a district federal court ruled in favor of EMU — a ruling that has now been reversed.
“A university cannot compel a student to alter or violate her belief systems based on a phantom policy as the price for obtaining a degree …,” wrote the Sixth Circuit. “Why treat Ward differently? That her conflict arose from religious convictions is not a good answer; that her conflict arose from religious convictions for which the department at times showed little tolerance is a worse answer.”
The court continued: “Ward was willing to work with all clients and to respect the school’s affirmation directives in doing so. That is why she asked to refer gay and lesbian clients (and some heterosexual clients) if the conversation required her to affirm their sexual practices. What more could the rule require? Surely, for example, the ban on discrimination against clients based on their religion (1) does not require a Muslim counselor to tell a Jewish client that his religious beliefs are correct if the conversation takes a turn in that direction and (2) does not require an atheist counselor to tell a person of faith that there is a God if the client is wrestling with faith-based issues. Tolerance is a two-way street. Otherwise, the rule mandates orthodoxy, not anti-discrimination.”
Related posts:
About The Author
-
Advertise Here
-
-
-
-
6 Responses and Counting...
This was a ridiculous case. Whoever thought the school would get away with something like that, and the person who initially asked for the student's expulsion, should lose their jobs. You can't kick someone out of your university because they don't agree with you. That's the whole point of going to college. To be surrounded by differing view points and experiences.
A good ruling by the sixth circuit.
Um, that's 3? If I lose count, you should get nervous
Wait Burl. This a conflict on the social front. I know how you are on these issues.
No one HAS to like anyone nor should they be compelled to like anyone by the court system. The woman just needs to demonstrate that she can pass her course work and do her job and I think she has done so. Hell, that's a fact of life Todd. We all do jobs or have jobs in which we have to do things we don't like or serve people we don't particularly care for; it's just that most of us keep quiet about so as not to end up like Ms Ward.
What can I say? A blind squirrel finds a nut every now and again ; )
Leave a Reply