Atheist student group discriminated against at WLU

[brian]

I got this from HAM.  Apparently a group at Wilfrid Laurier University that stated their goal was "to promote science, freedom of inquiry, skepticism, and a good life without the need for superstition or religious belief" was denied their student group application because of this.  I guess these things are bad when they piss off closed minded

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/admitting_that_you_have_no_rel.php
(there are more links on that blog post to other blog posts of relevance to the issue)

My opinion:  This is fucking bullshit.  I'm sorry, maybe it has something to do with all the beer I drank earlier tonight, but I can't think of any other, more diplomatic way to describe this open act of discrimination against the nonreligious without resorting to profanity.  This is just plain fucked up, and a big "fuck you" directed towards whoever made this ignorant decision is in order.  We need to say that it is not okay to discriminate against us, and we are not an acceptable target for hatred and scapegoating by ignorant theists.

Action:  I think we should at least send a message of support showing that we stand in solidarity with them.  I would be willing to write one up (at least one that is of a decent length and has some actual substance) and send it out tomorrow or Wednesday with the consent of the membership (although I can't imagine an dissent on such an issue).  With the permission of the LFA folks of course, I think we should at least send an angry letter to the folks at the WLU Student Union.  I don't want to piss them off, I just want to get through to them to inform them that the nonreligious are people too and have the same rights as Christians, Jews, Muslims or Hindus.

[Katie]

Well, apparently they're already getting flooded with e-mail.

As to the incident itself, it's just a case of hyper-sensitivity in regards to religion. Some religious people are so insecure about the fact that other people exist, that anything that claims to not be of their religion is percieved as some violent assault. Therefore, a group that claims to be non-religious in general not only "violently assaults" one religion, but all religions, and the people down at WLU find that to be disturbing.

The part about "not actively supporting anti-religious views" is bullshit. Does that mean that they support honour killings because the Muslims have a group? Or that they support Zionists because the Jews have a group?

[Steven]

I agree; total fucking bullshit.

I'm sure they approved Campus for Christ without batting an eye. A religious group, which believes that it alone has the truth, necessarily has to exclude people who believe differently. I'm sure they'd say "Hey, we include everyone...as long as they accept Christ as their personal saviour".

And what about all the other student groups? Do non-engineers get to join the engineering group? Can I join a sorority ? Of course, you can't officially bar anyone from joining whatever group they want, but there will obviously be other, unofficial barriers to certain people joining. Just as I wouldn't expect to get very far in a Christian group, we don't expect many theists to join our group. As nice as it would be that everyone was accepted everywhere, it just isn't the case; we all have groups of various kinds, with different criteria, and they are defined as much by who they keep out as who they keep in.

[trevor]

As already mentioned, bullshit etc.

But this reminds me of something I saw when I was out in Guelph: Memorial University of Newfoundland and Lakehead in Thunder Bay, ON have barred pre-existing pro-life groups from canvassing or accessing student fees, meeting spaces and other benefits reserved for clubs. Link

The headline is pretty spectacular: "Pro-life clubs aborted from campus"

Anyone have thoughts on that one?

[Steven]

I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I support their right to say what they want (as much as I disagree with them), but on the other hand, if they were accosting people and causing trouble then I would at least support the university's decision to deny them access to university resources.

[brian]

I am pro-choice, and in my opinion, there is grounds to "abort" pro-life groups if they are anti-woman, just like it would be appropriate for a students union to disallow say, a KKK student group (an extreme example, I know) on the grounds that it is anti-black, or a group opposing LGBT rights on the grounds that it is anti-gay.

(If you believe that freedom of speech includes hate speech, then my whole argument falls to pieces, but legally speaking we have a reasonable limits clause in section 1 of the Charter and the legal precedent is that hate speech falls beyond that reasonable limit.  Of course, you are free to disagree with the Charter and its interpretations, as I strongly disagree with the "supremacy of God" bit.)

Anyways, back on track, the big issue is whether pro-life attitudes are fundamentally anti-woman or not.  If they are, then these groups should be "aborted", but if they are not then it should be handled on a case by case basis (of course, this would be a lot easier to do if the group is a chapter of an established pro-life group as they already have a record).  It is a tricky issue, but I would say that they probably are anti-woman as their fundamental purpose is to revoke women's rights to control their own reproductive systems.

And I also believe that religious groups should not be exempted from hate speech rules.  There is no practical difference between promoting hatred based on your interpretation of religion and promoting hatred based on some other irrational notion.

Now, when it comes to religious groups I think it is safe to say that freethought, atheist, or humanist groups that practice positive atheism do not fall under the category of anti-religious because generally all we do is try to live our lives without religion, which we obviously have the right to do.  When we engage in political action, it is generally only to defend religious freedom, secularism, and science education, which can sometimes piss off majorities who are used to getting special treatment.  The big difference between us and most religious (especially Christian) groups is that we don't go around telling people that their religion is stupid and wrong and they are going to go to a place with fire and pain and suffering for all eternity unless they join us.

[Steven]

Now that I think about it, I agree with your interpretation of pro-life groups as being anti-woman. I guess it would be the same as having a group devoted to repealing the same-sex marriage laws.

[Katie]

For pro-life groups, I believe that they have a right to speak their mind. Just as long as their tactics don't bridge over into harassment, and their recruitment campaigns are tasteful, I wouldn't mind them getting University funding. But if they yell at women through mega-phones, and have giant signs with "aborted" feti, then I wouldn't want them to have the University funding their actions.

[january]

Pro-life groups are also banned from Carleton University. I find them very hateful. They stand in a line for hours at my university's most prominent intersection, with creepy posters and chants of murder accusations. They pester everyone who walks by...I am so sickened by their patriarchal Catholic bullshit. Harassing women on the street is not cool. I'm usually pretty laid back, but these people make me want to commit drive-by eggings, complete with fertilized eggs.