A federal judge ruled in favor of a public university who removed a Christian student over her belief that homosexuality is morally wrong. The decision, according to Julea Ward’s attorneys, could result in 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 because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.
The university contended she violated school policy and the American Counseling Association code of ethics.
“Christian students shouldn’t be expelled for holding to and abiding by their beliefs,” said ADF senior counsel David French. “To reach its decision, the court had to do something that’s never been done in federal court: uphold an extremely broad and vague university speech code.”
Eastern Michigan University hailed the decision.
“We are pleased that the court has upheld our position in this matter,” EMU spokesman Walter Kraft said in a written statement. “Julea Ward was not discriminated against because of her religion. To the contrary, Eastern Michigan is deeply committed to the education of our students and welcomes individuals from diverse backgrounds into our community.”
In his 48-page opinion, Judge Steeh said the university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics.
“Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values,” he wrote in a portion of his ruling posted by The Detroit News. “In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.”
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.
The case is similar to a lawsuit the ADF filed against Augusta State University in Georgia. Counseling student Jennifer Keeton was allegedly told to stop sharing her Christian beliefs in order to graduate.
Keeton’s lawsuit alleged that she was told to undergo a reeducation program and attend “diversity sensitivity training.”
University officials declined to comment on specifics of the lawsuit but released a statement to FOX News that said Augusta State does not discriminate on the basis of students’ moral, religious, political or personal beliefs.
Tedesco said both cases should be a warning to Christians attending public colleges and universities.
“Public universities are imposing the ideological stances of private groups on their students,” he said. “If you don’t comply, you will be kicked out. It’s scary stuff and it’s not a difficult thing to see what’s coming down the pike.”
The Alliance Defense Fund told FOX News Radio they will appeal the ruling.
Todd Starnes is a FOX News Radio reporter and best-selling author.
[...] “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.” By Todd Starnes [...]
Todd,
It is my understanding that the ACA has gay “activists” within their TOP leadership! I am thinking there might be a bigger story under the table here for an investigative reporter.
I personally disappointed. As a teacher, many of my students have expressed that they would like to attend college. Many of then are Catholics and come from low-earning households. This means that they will go to public colleges and most likely get some sort of financial aid. The new trend in criticizing religious beliefs is dangerous for them. Soon they’ll be asking students in any field to make moral decisions based on the universities beliefs not on what they truly believe in their hearts to be correct. I don’t always agree with what my students tell me, but in no way does that go past the classroom. In no way do their beliefs affect their grades or how I treat them. This is what I was taught to do. I was told in the credential program to accept all students regardless of what they believe. Yet, when they get to the university level those professors are allowed to judge a student based on their religious stance. Why is it that religious people are always told they have to accept other people unlike them (ie gays), yet those other people don’t have to accept religious people. Besides, there isn’t a major religion in the world that actually believes that being gay is morally right. My students have said that they would rather go to a religious school where people believe the same way they do, they just can’t afford it. So to the courts- should we segregate people based on religion or should we accept all people regardless. I guess a better way to look at this is what if I had a student didn’t want to do a written project in my class (without asking why or knowing why). Should I automatically fail them, or (as I was taught in my credential program) should I give them a different assignment to accommodate whatever issues they have. The later is called differentiating instruction. So to the courts again-how come for 13 school years students work under teachers who are supposed to differentiate their instructions, yet in college nothing is tolerated and professors don’t have to differentiate their instructions. No, students have to believe like the professor or program in order to be successful (wait isn’t there a book on this called “The Giver”?). Next the courts will be telling religious people that they have to live in concentrated areas (Nazis), or that anyone who is different to use different public areas (pre-racial descrimination). The judges must be “gay” to vote that everyone has to believe that gays are the be all end all. Yeah they need to go to college again and see how much tolerance is actually put up with. The courts are the ones that create descrimination and religious profiling, not the general public.
Yep leave it to the courts to say there should be no descriminating by descriminating against someone’s beliefs.
I personally disappointed. As a teacher, many of my students have expressed that they would like to attend college. Many of then are Catholics and come from low-earning households. This means that they will go to public colleges and most likely get some sort of financial aid. The new trend in criticizing religious beliefs is dangerous for them. Soon they’ll be asking students in any field to make moral decisions based on the universities beliefs not on what they truly believe in their hearts to be correct. I don’t always agree with what my students tell me, but in no way does that go past the classroom. In no way do their beliefs affect their grades or how I treat them. This is what I was taught to do. I was told in the credential program to accept all students regardless of what they believe. Yet, when they get to the university level those professors are allowed to judge a student based on their religious stance. Why is it that religious people are always told they have to accept other people unlike them (ie gays), yet those other people don’t have to accept religious people. Besides, there isn’t a major religion in the world that actually believes that being gay is morally right. My students have said that they would rather go to a religious school where people believe the same way they do, they just can’t afford it. So to the courts- should we segregate people based on religion or should we accept all people regardless. I guess a better way to look at this is what if I had a student didn’t want to do a written project in my class (without asking why or knowing why). Should I automatically fail them, or (as I was taught in my credential program) should I give them a different assignment to accommodate whatever issues they have. The later is called differentiating instruction. So to the courts again-how come for 13 school years students work under teachers who are supposed to differentiate their instructions, yet in college nothing is tolerated and professors don’t have to differentiate their instructions. No, students have to believe like the professor or program in order to be successful (wait isn’t there a book on this called “The Giver”?). Next the courts will be telling religious people that they have to live in concentrated areas (Nazis), or that anyone who is different to use different public areas (pre-racial descrimination). The judges must be “gay” to vote that everyone has to believe that gays are the be all end all. Yeah they need to go to college again and see how much tolerance is actually put up with. The courts are the ones that create descrimination and religious profiling, not the general public.