Add a Comment
Email This
Statistics
Thread parent sort order:
Thread verbosity:
0 Nerd-Its
RE: Are you kidding?
Oh, I generally agree. I was just taking exception to the "is the day of the heterosexual over" question. It's scaremongering.
As long as they aren't taking government money, they should be able to ban anyone they want.
I think there's probably a little more complexity called for in the Penn State case. I don't think the school should be able to deny them registration on the grounds of their political stance - but I think it's probably inappropriate for the school to recognize groups that unfairly discriminate in their memberships. So if the STRAIGHT charter said "no gays allowed", they probably shouldn't be recognized. If they were willing to accept homosexual members, then they should.
This comment has 5 replies.
RSS
RE: Are you kidding?
I don't think the number of Americans who are gay or the concept of treating homosexuals with "ordinary dignity" has anything to do with the post. This issue is about the "tables being turned" in these two cases - heterosexuals not being allowed to form clubs or go into bars whereas the previous "society as we know it" tended to discriminate against homosexuals.
Personally, I think the bar should be able to ban whomever they choose. If they want to just let gay red-heads into the bar, or reserve a special seat for people with extra large moles, that's their right as a private organization. Penn State, on the other hand, is a publicly funded university; a registration denial to a heterosexual group is as uncalled for as a denial to a homosexual group (or a chess club, mechanical engineering society, etc.).
View Full Discussion