Quote
The Law Society of British Columbia is appealing a BC Supreme Court ruling which told the society to reconsider its decision not to accredit a law school at Christian Trinity Western University (TWU).
The society said Jan 5, 2016, that Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson erred in deciding the procedure followed by society directors was inappropriate, and erred in finding TWU was not afforded procedural fairness.
The law society's directors initially voted to accept TWU's future graduates in April 2014. Six months later, they rescinded that decision after an outcry from their members prompted a referendum.
He said the directors should have stuck to their more careful weighing of the Charter rights in question —
"I find that the decision was made without proper consideration and balancing of the Charter rights at issue, and therefore cannot stand," Hinkson ruled.
Society president David Crossin disagreed, saying in a news release that the society should be guided by its members' voices. "The circumstances surrounding the proposal for a law school at TWU raise issues regarding two competing Charter rights and values: the equality rights of the LGBTQ community and the position taken by TWU concerning religious freedom," he says.
Crossin says it's a constitutional question that should be resolved in an appeal court.[/i]
http://www.dailyxtra.com/vancouver/news-and-ideas/news/law-society-appeals-bc-supreme-court-trinity-western-decision-182933
This case raises some interesting legal and non-legal points:
1. Freedom of religion versus equality rights for gays and lesbians. Which freedom takes front seat?
2. What is the right for the BC Legal Society to respect the votes of it's membership when it comes to accreditation?
3. Is it appropriate for a school to restrict students from personal/private sexual practices?
Feel free to address one or all.
[size=85]I would like to note this is a legal not a religious discussion. This is not a comment or attack on Christianity.[/size]
1. We are a secular society. Human rights trumps religion.
2. Law Societies are a subversive political activist group. They should have no say in such matters.
3. No. Nor do they have the right, and should be reminded.
Quote from: "Mr Crowley"
2. Law Societies are a subversive political activist group. They should have no say in such matters.
3. No. Nor do they have the right, and should be reminded.
1. Freedom of religion is a human right. It's post-secondary. Students agree to the school rules.
2. The Society is the regulatory body for the legal profession. What would you have in it's place?
3. Why don't they have the right?
Quote from: "RW"
Quote
The Law Society of British Columbia is appealing a BC Supreme Court ruling which told the society to reconsider its decision not to accredit a law school at Christian Trinity Western University (TWU).
The society said Jan 5, 2016, that Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson erred in deciding the procedure followed by society directors was inappropriate, and erred in finding TWU was not afforded procedural fairness.
The law society's directors initially voted to accept TWU's future graduates in April 2014. Six months later, they rescinded that decision after an outcry from their members prompted a referendum.
He said the directors should have stuck to their more careful weighing of the Charter rights in question —
"I find that the decision was made without proper consideration and balancing of the Charter rights at issue, and therefore cannot stand," Hinkson ruled.
Society president David Crossin disagreed, saying in a news release that the society should be guided by its members' voices. "The circumstances surrounding the proposal for a law school at TWU raise issues regarding two competing Charter rights and values: the equality rights of the LGBTQ community and the position taken by TWU concerning religious freedom," he says.
Crossin says it's a constitutional question that should be resolved in an appeal court.[/i]
http://www.dailyxtra.com/vancouver/news-and-ideas/news/law-society-appeals-bc-supreme-court-trinity-western-decision-182933
This case raises some interesting legal and non-legal points:
1. Freedom of religion versus equality rights for gays and lesbians. Which freedom takes front seat?
2. What is the right for the BC Legal Society to respect the votes of it's membership when it comes to accreditation?
3. Is it appropriate for a school to restrict students from personal/private sexual practices?
Feel free to address one or all.
[size=85]I would like to note this is a legal not a religious discussion. This is not a comment or attack on Christianity.[/size]
This is as much bullshit as Dalhousie giving the boot to dental students for shit that was none of the uni's fucking business. :negative:
1. That depends entirely on the context. In most cases, they should not be in conflict in the public domain. In this case, TWU is a private institution, so their right to religious freedom should take precedence in defining their own covenant. I don't agree with it, but it's not up to me, you, or the courts.
2. Accreditation should be based on an objective evaluation matrix of education qualifications, not on arbitrary and subjective social justice issues. TWU's covenant does not affect their ability to train and produce qualified lawyers. The members should not be permitted to influence an objective evaluation based on their desire to penalize a private entity for its social views.
3. Yes. It is a private institution.
Since when does the law in Western democracies permit private institutions to discriminate?
Anti discrimination applies to ALL. If that lunatic asylum withdraws or penalizes services on the basis of sexual orientation, it commits an offence.
The law society is then compounding the stupidity by enforcing its accreditations standards on the basis of a perceived disrcimination that has NO bearing on whether or not the graduates should be admitted to the bar. Clearly, they take the view that the graduates must support sexual discrimination, otherwise why would they attend the school. However, if the law society imposes its authority on the premise of some form of bias, than it needs to look within before tiptoeing in that minefield.
That's true about a private institution not being able to discriminate.
To me, it's a matter of the wishes of a religious INSTITUTION vs PERSONAL human rights. Which wins? Personal rights should win IMHO.
Quote from: "RW"
To me, it's a matter of the wishes of a religious INSTITUTION vs PERSONAL human rights. Which wins? Personal rights should win IMHO.
Don't attend an evangelical church or any mosque if you don't like what they stand for. Don't attend their schools either and ur problem is solved.
Quote from: "Shen Li"
Quote from: "RW"
To me, it's a matter of the wishes of a religious INSTITUTION vs PERSONAL human rights. Which wins? Personal rights should win IMHO.
Don't attend an evangelical church or any mosque if you don't like what they stand for. Don't attend their schools either and ur problem is solved.
This isn't a church. It's a school. And I wouldn't touch TWU with a 10-foot poll but does that mean they are allowed to discriminate? Should they not be allowed to let non-Christians attend? Or blacks? Or how about Chinese people? Where are we going to draw the line if we allow discrimination?
Also, TWU has received PUBLIC funding:
The Harper government has awarded over $20 million of its infrastructure funding to Christian colleges and universities since the launch of the Knowledge Infrastructure Program in 2009 ($2.6 million for Trinity Western University).
Quote from: "Mr Crowley"
Anti discrimination applies to ALL. If that lunatic asylum withdraws or penalizes services on the basis of sexual orientation, it commits an offence.
The law society is then compounding the stupidity by enforcing its accreditations standards on the basis of a perceived disrcimination that has NO bearing on whether or not the graduates should be admitted to the bar. Clearly, they take the view that the graduates must support sexual discrimination, otherwise why would they attend the school. However, if the law society imposes its authority on the premise of some form of bias, than it needs to look within before tiptoeing in that minefield.
Sorry I guess I didn't express my thought very clearly. They shouldn't be allowed to discriminate based on being a private institution, but in the event of a conflict like this one, they should be allowed to select which charter right they feel should take precedence on that basis. I would argue that they aren't necessarily committing an offence as there is a clear conflict with their right to exercise their religious freedoms. One or the other is violated, so my opinion is that the private institution should select which it's going to be.
I think we agree on the second part. The accreditation standards should not make value judgements. If that was the norm, we wouldn't have any lawyers.
Quote from: "RW"
To me, it's a matter of the wishes of a religious INSTITUTION vs PERSONAL human rights. Which wins? Personal rights should win IMHO.
I don't think it's that black and white. You have to evaluate this on a situational basis. While I certainly agree with you that personal human rights have more value than religious ones, that is imposing my own value judgement rather than the intent of the charter. Allowing the masses to impose value judgements on minorities is precisely what the charter is meant to prevent.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Shen Li"
Quote from: "RW"
To me, it's a matter of the wishes of a religious INSTITUTION vs PERSONAL human rights. Which wins? Personal rights should win IMHO.
Don't attend an evangelical church or any mosque if you don't like what they stand for. Don't attend their schools either and ur problem is solved.
This isn't a church. It's a school. And I wouldn't touch TWU with a 10-foot poll but does that mean they are allowed to discriminate? Should they not be allowed to let non-Christians attend? Or blacks? Or how about Chinese people? Where are we going to draw the line if we allow discrimination?
Also, TWU has received PUBLIC funding:
The Harper government has awarded over $20 million of its infrastructure funding to Christian colleges and universities since the launch of the Knowledge Infrastructure Program in 2009 ($2.6 million for Trinity Western University).
That one is easy. TWU should not, under any circumstances, be receiving public funds.
Quote from: "reel"
Quote from: "RW"
To me, it's a matter of the wishes of a religious INSTITUTION vs PERSONAL human rights. Which wins? Personal rights should win IMHO.
I don't think it's that black and white. You have to evaluate this on a situational basis. While I certainly agree with you that personal human rights have more value than religious ones, that is imposing my own value judgement rather than the intent of the charter. Allowing the masses to impose value judgements on minorities is precisely what the charter is meant to prevent.
Religious rights are personal rights when it involves the rights of a person.
I think the easy solution would be for the SCHOOL to mind it's own business what/who a student does on his/her free time pretty much like every other school does.
Quote from: "reel"
Quote from: "Mr Crowley"
Anti discrimination applies to ALL. If that lunatic asylum withdraws or penalizes services on the basis of sexual orientation, it commits an offence.
The law society is then compounding the stupidity by enforcing its accreditations standards on the basis of a perceived disrcimination that has NO bearing on whether or not the graduates should be admitted to the bar. Clearly, they take the view that the graduates must support sexual discrimination, otherwise why would they attend the school. However, if the law society imposes its authority on the premise of some form of bias, than it needs to look within before tiptoeing in that minefield.
Sorry I guess I didn't express my thought very clearly. They shouldn't be allowed to discriminate based on being a private institution, but in the event of a conflict like this one, they should be allowed to select which charter right they feel should take precedence on that basis. I would argue that they aren't necessarily committing an offence as there is a clear conflict with their right to exercise their religious freedoms. One or the other is violated, so my opinion is that the private institution should select which it's going to be.
I think we agree on the second part. The accreditation standards should not make value judgements. If that was the norm, we wouldn't have any lawyers.
I disagree that they should be allowed to select the "character" when it means discriminating against someone's protected human rights. If you are going to make that a rule, then restrict ALL students from pre-marital sex.
Quote from: "RW"
Religious rights are personal rights when it involves the rights of a person.
I think the easy solution would be for the SCHOOL to mind it's own business what/who a student does on his/her free time pretty much like every other school does.
In France, the only good local school was the catholic school. We walked into the courtyard one day to the kid, arms pointed at the sky, shouting "The Sky Spirits love me!" at the top of her lungs.
Fortunately there were no repercussions.
That said, in this sort of a conflict, I don't think it's up to us to impose values whether it is an individual, a school, or otherwise.
Quote from: "RW"
I disagree that they should be allowed to select the "character" when it means discriminating against someone's protected human rights. If you are going to make that a rule, then restrict
I believe they do... Sex outside of a heterosexual marriage includes everyone, it just also specifically negates the validity of homosexual marriage.
Quote from: "reel"
Quote from: "RW"
I disagree that they should be allowed to select the "character" when it means discriminating against someone's protected human rights. If you are going to make that a rule, then restrict
I believe they do... Sex outside of a heterosexual marriage includes everyone, it just also specifically negates the validity of homosexual marriage.
I'll have to look that up specifically. The fact that they mention only homosexual sex makes me wonder if it is just that. Why else would the story be that specific?
Quote from: "reel"
Quote from: "RW"
Religious rights are personal rights when it involves the rights of a person.
I think the easy solution would be for the SCHOOL to mind it's own business what/who a student does on his/her free time pretty much like every other school does.
In France, the only good local school was the catholic school. We walked into the courtyard one day to the kid, arms pointed at the sky, shouting "The Sky Spirits love me!" at the top of her lungs.
Fortunately there were no repercussions.
That said, in this sort of a conflict, I don't think it's up to us to impose values whether it is an individual, a school, or otherwise.
What "values" would we be imposing?
Quote from: "reel"
That one is easy. TWU should not, under any circumstances, be receiving public funds.
Good luck with that one reel. The previous Alberta government gave $250,000 to Islamists who financed HAMAS' fund collector and invited promoters of sharia in Edmonton. The feds have given cultural grants and tax-free status to similar groups(some have had that revoked). I would like to see pandering to religious communities with my money halted, but expect this bullshit to get worse under the current regime.
They still have tax breaks.
The following is Trinity's website.
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
I see this issue as one of freedom of association - specifically the right to associate with people who share the same values. Some schools have a dress code; this one has a behaviour code. A contract is a contract. If you can't adhere to their rules then don't go there.
I thought the role of the law society was to determine whether or not TWU meets the academic requirements to produce qualified lawyers, not to decide who people have to hang out with. Their decision and the way they arrived at it (by referendum) has shown that not only are they a bunch of bullies, but they're also incompetent judges. This whole thing is an embarrassment to the people of BC. It makes us look like idiots.
Quote from: "easter bunny"
I haven't given it a lot of thought easter bunny, but that's how I see it too..
Even their conduct code appears to be more of a request than a requirement.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
Voluntarily abstain but what is the consequence if they don't abstain? According to the media, it could be expulsion.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
Voluntarily abstain but what is the consequence if they don't abstain? According to the media, it could be expulsion.
From the same website.
I assume they cannot take part in the faith based part of academic life at Trinity.
Quote from: "RW"
They get beheaded. It's in the fine print. =P
Quote from: "easter bunny"
I thought the role of the law society was to determine whether or not TWU meets the academic requirements to produce qualified lawyers, not to decide who people have to hang out with. Their decision and the way they arrived at it (by referendum) has shown that not only are they a bunch of bullies, but they're also incompetent judges. This whole thing is an embarrassment to the people of BC. It makes us look like idiots.
The Law Society's role extends far beyond that. From their page:
"The Law Society of British Columbia upholds and protects the public interest in the administration of justice by ensuring the independence, integrity and competence of lawyers, establishing education and professional development standards for lawyers, regulating the practice of law and preserving and protecting the rights and freedoms of all persons."
The concern is that the school has competing Charter rights and values, and that the public and the legal profession is better served having these fundemental issues resolved before it grants registration.
I don't think it makes us look like idiots at all. I think it's a valid Charter challenge.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
Voluntarily abstain but what is the consequence if they don't abstain? According to the media, it could be expulsion.
From the same website.
I assume they cannot take part in the faith based part of academic life at Trinity.
It's still discriminatory.
Although I think it's absolutely ludicrous for a school to force students to adhere to a "Community Covenant", I think it's all right for them to impose such things so long as they aren't getting tax dollars or breaks. I don't want to support funding a learning institution that discriminates against freedoms guaranteed under the Charter.
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
They get beheaded. It's in the fine print. =P
lol easter bunny, The Law Society makes it seem like that..
:laugh:
But seriously though, they assume someone who abides by a covenant cannot be impartial and that's untrue, ignorant and insulting.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
I thought the role of the law society was to determine whether or not TWU meets the academic requirements to produce qualified lawyers, not to decide who people have to hang out with. Their decision and the way they arrived at it (by referendum) has shown that not only are they a bunch of bullies, but they're also incompetent judges. This whole thing is an embarrassment to the people of BC. It makes us look like idiots.
The Law Society's role extends far beyond that. From their page:
"The Law Society of British Columbia upholds and protects the public interest in the administration of justice by ensuring the independence, integrity and competence of lawyers, establishing education and professional development standards for lawyers, regulating the practice of law and preserving and protecting the rights and freedoms of all persons."
The concern is that the school has competing Charter rights and values, and that the public and the legal profession is better served having these fundemental issues resolved before it grants registration.
I agree that it's a valid Charter challenge, but it looked stupid to me because they made their initial judgement based on academic considerations, and then changed their decision because it hurt the feelings of a bunch of their members.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
Voluntarily abstain but what is the consequence if they don't abstain? According to the media, it could be expulsion.
From the same website.
I assume they cannot take part in the faith based part of academic life at Trinity.
It's still discriminatory.
Although I think it's absolutely ludicrous for a school to force students to adhere to a "Community Covenant", I think it's all right for them to impose such things so long as they aren't getting tax dollars or breaks. I don't want to support funding a learning institution that discriminates against freedoms guaranteed under the Charter.
This is from their website too.
First, TWU's faculty, like faculty at all universities in Canada, compete for research grants through the processes established by the funding agencies. It is a small but important part of our budget and helps us raise the profile of TWU within the academic community in Canada.
Second, during the last recession, the federal government made available one-time funds under its Knowledge Infrastructure Program. TWU applied for and received funds at that time. The funds received amounted to less than ½ of 1 percent of the funds provided by the Program in British Columbia
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
I thought the role of the law society was to determine whether or not TWU meets the academic requirements to produce qualified lawyers, not to decide who people have to hang out with. Their decision and the way they arrived at it (by referendum) has shown that not only are they a bunch of bullies, but they're also incompetent judges. This whole thing is an embarrassment to the people of BC. It makes us look like idiots.
The Law Society's role extends far beyond that. From their page:
"The Law Society of British Columbia upholds and protects the public interest in the administration of justice by ensuring the independence, integrity and competence of lawyers, establishing education and professional development standards for lawyers, regulating the practice of law and preserving and protecting the rights and freedoms of all persons."
The concern is that the school has competing Charter rights and values, and that the public and the legal profession is better served having these fundemental issues resolved before it grants registration.
I agree that it's a valid Charter challenge, but it looked stupid to me because they made their initial judgement based on academic considerations, and then changed their decision because it hurt the feelings of a bunch of their members.
Seems someone pointed out something that they mulled over. It was a 3-1 vote for not allowing TWU law graduates.
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
I thought the role of the law society was to determine whether or not TWU meets the academic requirements to produce qualified lawyers, not to decide who people have to hang out with. Their decision and the way they arrived at it (by referendum) has shown that not only are they a bunch of bullies, but they're also incompetent judges. This whole thing is an embarrassment to the people of BC. It makes us look like idiots.
The Law Society's role extends far beyond that. From their page:
"The Law Society of British Columbia upholds and protects the public interest in the administration of justice by ensuring the independence, integrity and competence of lawyers, establishing education and professional development standards for lawyers, regulating the practice of law and preserving and protecting the rights and freedoms of all persons."
The concern is that the school has competing Charter rights and values, and that the public and the legal profession is better served having these fundemental issues resolved before it grants registration.
I agree that it's a valid Charter challenge, but it looked stupid to me because they made their initial judgement based on academic considerations, and then changed their decision because it hurt the feelings of a bunch of their members.
A voluntary covenant is a charter violation?
ac_wot
It likely is a competing value, but a charter violation?
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
Voluntarily abstain but what is the consequence if they don't abstain? According to the media, it could be expulsion.
From the same website.
I assume they cannot take part in the faith based part of academic life at Trinity.
It's still discriminatory.
Although I think it's absolutely ludicrous for a school to force students to adhere to a "Community Covenant", I think it's all right for them to impose such things so long as they aren't getting tax dollars or breaks. I don't want to support funding a learning institution that discriminates against freedoms guaranteed under the Charter.
This is from their website too.
First, TWU's faculty, like faculty at all universities in Canada, compete for research grants through the processes established by the funding agencies. It is a small but important part of our budget and helps us raise the profile of TWU within the academic community in Canada.
Second, during the last recession, the federal government made available one-time funds under its Knowledge Infrastructure Program. TWU applied for and received funds at that time. The funds received amounted to less than ½ of 1 percent of the funds provided by the Program in British Columbia
They still received funding and get tax breaks.
Quote
http://ablawg.ca/2015/03/09/trinity-western-university-your-tax-dollars-at-work/
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
I thought the role of the law society was to determine whether or not TWU meets the academic requirements to produce qualified lawyers, not to decide who people have to hang out with. Their decision and the way they arrived at it (by referendum) has shown that not only are they a bunch of bullies, but they're also incompetent judges. This whole thing is an embarrassment to the people of BC. It makes us look like idiots.
The Law Society's role extends far beyond that. From their page:
"The Law Society of British Columbia upholds and protects the public interest in the administration of justice by ensuring the independence, integrity and competence of lawyers, establishing education and professional development standards for lawyers, regulating the practice of law and preserving and protecting the rights and freedoms of all persons."
The concern is that the school has competing Charter rights and values, and that the public and the legal profession is better served having these fundemental issues resolved before it grants registration.
I agree that it's a valid Charter challenge, but it looked stupid to me because they made their initial judgement based on academic considerations, and then changed their decision because it hurt the feelings of a bunch of their members.
A voluntary covenant is a charter violation?
ac_wot
It likely is a competing value, but a charter violation?
If it penalizes or discriminates against someone who doesn't sign or breaks the covenant based on their guaranteed freedoms then it's a Charter violation.
Quote from: "RW"
The way I understood it, they approved Trinity at first and then a few days later they changed their minds. It just seemed pretty unprofessional to me. I don't have a problem with TWU having certain entry requirements, but it does get complicated when you add public funding to the equation.
What the TWU site says about their Community Covenant:
The Community Covenant is included within the application process, and those applying for community membership should read the statement carefully.
https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/university-policies/community-covenant.html
https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/university-policies/community-covenant-agreement.html
Sure doesn't sound optional...
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
The way I understood it, they approved Trinity at first and then a few days later they changed their minds. It just seemed pretty unprofessional to me. I don't have a problem with TWU having certain entry requirements, but it does get complicated when you add public funding to the equation.
They had a vote of the full membership a few days later. No go was the result of said vote.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
Voluntarily abstain but what is the consequence if they don't abstain? According to the media, it could be expulsion.
From the same website.
I assume they cannot take part in the faith based part of academic life at Trinity.
It's still discriminatory.
Although I think it's absolutely ludicrous for a school to force students to adhere to a "Community Covenant", I think it's all right for them to impose such things so long as they aren't getting tax dollars or breaks. I don't want to support funding a learning institution that discriminates against freedoms guaranteed under the Charter.
This is from their website too.
First, TWU's faculty, like faculty at all universities in Canada, compete for research grants through the processes established by the funding agencies. It is a small but important part of our budget and helps us raise the profile of TWU within the academic community in Canada.
Second, during the last recession, the federal government made available one-time funds under its Knowledge Infrastructure Program. TWU applied for and received funds at that time. The funds received amounted to less than ½ of 1 percent of the funds provided by the Program in British Columbia
They still received funding and get tax breaks.
Quote
http://ablawg.ca/2015/03/09/trinity-western-university-your-tax-dollars-at-work/
It's considered a charity because it does charitable work..
They emphasize service on their website..
If you don't want to serve your fellow man, don't apply to Trinity's faith based programs.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
The way I understood it, they approved Trinity at first and then a few days later they changed their minds. It just seemed pretty unprofessional to me. I don't have a problem with TWU having certain entry requirements, but it does get complicated when you add public funding to the equation.
They had a vote of the full membership a few days later. No go was the result of said vote.
Imagine if the Supreme Court did that. :roll:
Oh and according to their procedures for infractions, suspension and expulsion may be punishment for Covenant breaches.
https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/university-policies/student-accountability-policy.html
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
The way I understood it, they approved Trinity at first and then a few days later they changed their minds. It just seemed pretty unprofessional to me. I don't have a problem with TWU having certain entry requirements, but it does get complicated when you add public funding to the equation.
They had a vote of the full membership a few days later. No go was the result of said vote.
Imagine if the Supreme Court did that. :roll:
The Supreme Court does "update" its decisions. It just usually takes decades rather than days.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Some opponents express the fear that TWU graduates will discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in their professional careers—despite the Supreme Court of Canada finding that there "wasn't a shred of evidence" of any discrimination when the same issue went before them in consideration of our ability to educate prospective teachers in 2001.
Voluntarily abstain but what is the consequence if they don't abstain? According to the media, it could be expulsion.
From the same website.
I assume they cannot take part in the faith based part of academic life at Trinity.
It's still discriminatory.
Although I think it's absolutely ludicrous for a school to force students to adhere to a "Community Covenant", I think it's all right for them to impose such things so long as they aren't getting tax dollars or breaks. I don't want to support funding a learning institution that discriminates against freedoms guaranteed under the Charter.
This is from their website too.
First, TWU's faculty, like faculty at all universities in Canada, compete for research grants through the processes established by the funding agencies. It is a small but important part of our budget and helps us raise the profile of TWU within the academic community in Canada.
Second, during the last recession, the federal government made available one-time funds under its Knowledge Infrastructure Program. TWU applied for and received funds at that time. The funds received amounted to less than ½ of 1 percent of the funds provided by the Program in British Columbia
They still received funding and get tax breaks.
Quote
http://ablawg.ca/2015/03/09/trinity-western-university-your-tax-dollars-at-work/
It's considered a charity because it does charitable work..
They emphasize service on their website..
If you don't want to serve your fellow man, don't apply to Trinity's faith based programs.
It still receives tax breaks.
We all understand the option to not attend is there but this is a legal debate. The issue is if whether or not they should be able to discriminate based on a Charter right that violates a Charter right.
Quote from: "RW"
https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/university-policies/community-covenant-agreement.html
That's where things get problematic for me wrt public funding. Do we also accept all the instructions in the Quran as virtuous?
Quote from: "RW"
https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/university-policies/student-accountability-policy.html
So depending on how you behave they can give you a timeout or they can permaban you. =P
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/university-policies/community-covenant-agreement.html
That's where things get problematic for me wrt public funding. Do we also accept all the instructions in the Quran as virtuous?
We are talking about a specific case with specific issues. I would prefer it not muddied with Islam shit if that's okay with you.
I do get your point though and no public funding would be appropriate IMHO.
The crux of this issue for me is that TWU is imposing on the rights of LGBT whereas the LGBT, through private sexual acts, is not imposing on the TWU's religious freedoms. Being that's the case, I think the CC is BS and needs to be stripped of said imposing language.
How many gay atheists are enrolled in TWU's law school anyway?
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
My guess would be zero unless their law school is above average which is even more reason to accredit them.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
https://twu.ca/studenthandbook/university-policies/community-covenant-agreement.html
That's where things get problematic for me wrt public funding. Do we also accept all the instructions in the Quran as virtuous?
We are talking about a specific case with specific issues. I would prefer it not muddied with Islam shit if that's okay with you.
I do get your point though and no public funding would be appropriate IMHO.
Agreed. Public funding is out. Otherwise we have to decide which religion qualifies and which doesn't.
Quote from: "RW"
The crux of this issue for me is that TWU is imposing on the rights of LGBT whereas the LGBT, through private sexual acts, is not imposing on the TWU's religious freedoms. Being that's the case, I think the CC is BS and needs to be stripped of said imposing language.
It's been a while but if I remember correctly I think I came to the conclusion that the language of the 'covenant' needed to be modified a little bit to include committed relationships, but the bit about abstaining from sex before commitment was okay.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
They would have to sign it to go to school there.
There are homosexuals who attend/have attended TWU BTW.
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
My guess would be zero unless their law school is above average which is even more reason to accredit them.
I pulled a number out of my butt. You know that right?
Hahaha
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
They would have to sign it to go to school there.
There are homosexuals who attend/have attended TWU BTW.
Of course there are gay people at Trinity and by signing the covenant they agree to be celibate..
So, why did they sign it?
Was a sexual encounter a one time lapse or did they have no intention of honouring their pledge?
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
Usually it's some militant atheists who want to bully someone and they know that Christians can't/won't do much to fight back.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
They would have to sign it to go to school there.
There are homosexuals who attend/have attended TWU BTW.
Of course there are gay people at Trinity and by signing the covenant they agree to be celibate..
So, why did they sign it?
Was a sexual encounter a one time lapse or did they have no intention of honouring their pledge?
I can't say. I'm sure there are more than a few people who signed the pledge with no intention of honouring it. I'm sure there are gay people who follow it to the word.
I would never agree to sign their covenant because I like cigarettes and liquor too much.
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
Usually it's some militant atheists who want to bully someone and they know that Christians can't/won't do much to fight back.
Oh bollocks. This isn't an issue of bullying. It's about constitutional rights and freedoms.
If I was a betting woman and this went to the Supreme Court (which it probably will), TWU will win.
I've also personally know a couple of the presidents of the Law Society in BC, including the current one, and they weren't atheists.
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Some people really like their booze and cigarettes and want to hang on to them while still doing all the other great things TWU does. Why shouldn't they be able to?
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
They would have to sign it to go to school there.
There are homosexuals who attend/have attended TWU BTW.
Of course there are gay people at Trinity and by signing the covenant they agree to be celibate..
So, why did they sign it?
Was a sexual encounter a one time lapse or did they have no intention of honouring their pledge?
I can't say. I'm sure there are more than a few people who signed the pledge with no intention of honouring it. I'm sure there are gay people who follow it to the word.
I have no doubt at all many students who signed that pledge had no intention of honouring it..
It would be like me seeking a job as an administrative assistant with NAC Canada when I'm pro life.
:confused1:
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Some people really like their booze and cigarettes and want to hang on to them while still doing all the other great things TWU does. Why shouldn't they be able to?
Because they said they wouldn't..
If a student finds themselves unable to maintain the integrity of their commitment they should seek a living-learning situation more acceptable to them.
So you would deny a person a better relationship with Christ, the community, or even themselves by attending TWU because of cigarettes and beer or cigars and wine?
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
Quote from: "RW"
TWU must be a really good school if smokers, and boozers are saying they will give up all their habits just to get in. :laugh3:
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Atheism isn't the issue but I don't know because I doubt anyone who is gay would risk putting themselves lest they be expelled.
My guess would be 1.
Why did they sign the covenant?
They would have to sign it to go to school there.
There are homosexuals who attend/have attended TWU BTW.
Of course there are gay people at Trinity and by signing the covenant they agree to be celibate..
So, why did they sign it?
Was a sexual encounter a one time lapse or did they have no intention of honouring their pledge?
I can't say. I'm sure there are more than a few people who signed the pledge with no intention of honouring it. I'm sure there are gay people who follow it to the word.
I have no doubt at all many students who signed that pledge had no intention of honouring it..
It would be like me seeking a job as an administrative assistant with NAC Canada when I'm pro life.
:confused1:
So if many students likely breach the pledge as you've just stated, what would become of TWU's enrolment numbers if all those disobedient students went elsewhere instead?
What is more important? Bringing students closer to Christ, the Bible, God, community service, etc, or insisting they don't gossip or swear or use tobacco or drink or make choices according to "biblical priorities" when it comes to selecting movies (all no no's in the ole TWU CC)?
Quote from: "seoulbro"
Quote from: "RW"
TWU must be a really good school if smokers, and boozers are saying they will give up all their habits just to get in. :laugh3:
Or a school full of rule breakers :wink:
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
What if they want faith based programs without all the rules?
Oh, I know! They just do it on the down low instead.
Quote from: "RW"
Maybe not in this case, but I've seen it plenty of times. They're a lot like trolls. They just want to stick their finger in someone's eye and twist it. And Christians are always an easy target. I'm getting sick and tired of watching it.
I know what you mean about the atheistic disrespect for anything religious. I can't say I'm a fan either.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
What if they want faith based programs without all the rules?
Oh, I know! They just do it on the down low instead.
They should be honest about that up front..
If I was employed by the National Council of Women of Canada I would be terminated if they knew my views on abortion and I stated them in public.
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Quote from: "RW"
Maybe not in this case, but I've seen it plenty of times. They're a lot like trolls. They just want to stick their finger in someone's eye and twist it. And Christians are always an easy target. I'm getting sick and tired of watching it.
You and me both.
They don't seem to pick on anyone else either. I wonder why.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
What if they want faith based programs without all the rules?
Oh, I know! They just do it on the down low instead.
They should be honest about that up front..
If I was employed by the National Council of Women of Canada I would be terminated if they knew my views on abortion and I stated them in public.
Would you? If I was your boss at the National Council of Women of Canada, I wouldn't care what your beliefs were. I'd care if you could do your job despite them. If you can't, then we'd have a problem.
That still doesn't change the fact that there are probably a good number of people attending TWU who don't adhere to all the rules. That's life as a human.
Quote from: "easter bunny"
Scale of influence on our society would be my guess.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
What if they want faith based programs without all the rules?
Oh, I know! They just do it on the down low instead.
They should be honest about that up front..
If I was employed by the National Council of Women of Canada I would be terminated if they knew my views on abortion and I stated them in public.
Would you? If I was your boss at the National Council of Women of Canada, I
That still doesn't change the fact that there are probably a good number of people attending TWU who don't adhere to all the rules. That's life as a human.
That's how I see the Law Society of BC and TWU students..
If grads from TWU cannot be faithful lawyers than they should be disbarred..
They shouldn't care about a pledge they signed as students..
They don't want to even give TWU grads a chance to prove themselves.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
What if they want faith based programs without all the rules?
Oh, I know! They just do it on the down low instead.
They should be honest about that up front..
If I was employed by the National Council of Women of Canada I would be terminated if they knew my views on abortion and I stated them in public.
I know if you were a new mp in Trudeau's government and you revealed your stance on abortion after you were elected, you would be out of caucus. Still employed for four years, but out of caucus.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
What if they want faith based programs without all the rules?
Oh, I know! They just do it on the down low instead.
They should be honest about that up front..
If I was employed by the National Council of Women of Canada I would be terminated if they knew my views on abortion and I stated them in public.
Would you? If I was your boss at the National Council of Women of Canada, I
That still doesn't change the fact that there are probably a good number of people attending TWU who don't adhere to all the rules. That's life as a human.
That's how I see the Law Society of BC and TWU students..
If grads from TWU cannot be faithful lawyers than they should be disbarred..
They shouldn't care about a pledge they signed as students..
They don't want to even give TWU grads a chance to prove themselves.
BC is not the only Law Society who isn't okay with their grads either but I do agree with you on that the law society should deal with the individual lawyers after they are called to the bar and not the school.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
If they signed the pledge about community standards, yes..
If they didn't sign it and only want non faith based programs that is not a problem at all, smoke away.
What if they want faith based programs without all the rules?
Oh, I know! They just do it on the down low instead.
They should be honest about that up front..
If I was employed by the National Council of Women of Canada I would be terminated if they knew my views on abortion and I stated them in public.
Would you? If I was your boss at the National Council of Women of Canada, I
That still doesn't change the fact that there are probably a good number of people attending TWU who don't adhere to all the rules. That's life as a human.
That's how I see the Law Society of BC and TWU students..
If grads from TWU cannot be faithful lawyers than they should be disbarred..
They shouldn't care about a pledge they signed as students..
They don't want to even give TWU grads a chance to prove themselves.
BC is not the only Law Society who isn't okay with their grads either but I do agree with you on that the law society should deal with the individual lawyers after they are called to the bar and not the school.
Punishing someone ahead of time doesn't sit well with me.
ac_unsure
I think there is more to it than that.
Quote from: "RW"
But that is how it affects people..
Would someone who received a law degree from a university in say Jamaica where homosexuality is illegal I believe not be accredited either?
There's only one Law Society in each province, so it's not like law grads have other options when they decide they don't like where you went to school.
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"
But that is how it affects people..
Would someone who received a law degree from a university in say Jamaica where homosexuality is illegal I believe not be accredited either?
There's only one Law Society in each province, so it's not like law grads have other options when they decide they don't like where you went to school.
I can't answer that because the National Committee on Accreditation doesn't provide a list of law schools they will accept applications from but it does look at the education and professional profile as well as competencies and skills of an individual applicant. You have to get past them before you can even apply to a provincial law society.
Quote from: "RW"
Quote
The Law Society of British Columbia is appealing a BC Supreme Court ruling which told the society to reconsider its decision not to accredit a law school at Christian Trinity Western University (TWU).
The society said Jan 5, 2016, that Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson erred in deciding the procedure followed by society directors was inappropriate, and erred in finding TWU was not afforded procedural fairness.
The law society's directors initially voted to accept TWU's future graduates in April 2014. Six months later, they rescinded that decision after an outcry from their members prompted a referendum.
He said the directors should have stuck to their more careful weighing of the Charter rights in question —
"I find that the decision was made without proper consideration and balancing of the Charter rights at issue, and therefore cannot stand," Hinkson ruled.
Society president David Crossin disagreed, saying in a news release that the society should be guided by its members' voices. "The circumstances surrounding the proposal for a law school at TWU raise issues regarding two competing Charter rights and values: the equality rights of the LGBTQ community and the position taken by TWU concerning religious freedom," he says.
Crossin says it's a constitutional question that should be resolved in an appeal court.[/i]
http://www.dailyxtra.com/vancouver/news-and-ideas/news/law-society-appeals-bc-supreme-court-trinity-western-decision-182933
This case raises some interesting legal and non-legal points:
1. Freedom of religion versus equality rights for gays and lesbians. Which freedom takes front seat?
2. What is the right for the BC Legal Society to respect the votes of it's membership when it comes to accreditation?
3. Is it appropriate for a school to restrict students from personal/private sexual practices?
Feel free to address one or all.
[size=85]I would like to note this is a legal not a religious discussion. This is not a comment or attack on Christianity.[/size]
One of the top guys at the BC Law Society compared the silly religious school pledge to discriminating on the grounds of race or some stupid analogy like that. The old and very tired ur Hitler, ur a nazi accusation. Fuck I hate that. :mad: