Free to be Distinctive?

/ January 3, 2013 / Comments Off on Free to be Distinctive? / Religious Freedom, Religious Hiring

* In mid-December, Eastern Michigan University agreed to pay Julea Ward $75,000 to settle her case against the university for expelling her from the counseling program after she referred a client desiring counsel to improve his homosexual relationship. She was willing to counsel him on any other matter but, as taught in the counseling program, sought to refer him to another counselor when he asked for help she could not in good conscience give. The university says that the settlement leaves its policies, curriculum, and counseling program requirements intact. But then Ward’s case was exactly that the counseling program violated its own stated policies in not accepting her request to refer the client.

* The 9th Circuit appeals court in San Francisco on Dec. 21 put on hold California’s ban on “reparative” or “conversion” therapy, which was to come into effect on Jan. 1, while a panel of judges will decide whether the ban violates the religious freedom of counselors, parents, and persons struggling with unwanted homosexual inclinations.

* The 9th Circuit appeals court on December 20 ruled that “[e]ven through the Boy Scouts of American bars atheists and gays, the city of San Diego is allowed to lease the group public property at nominal rates without running afoul of the state and federal constitutions.” The opinion notes, “There is no evidence that the city’s purpose in leasing the subject properties to the Boy Scouts was to advance religion, and there is abundant evidence that its purpose was to provide facilities and services for youth activities.”