University Tells Student to Alter Religious Views

[Calum Veteran]

That would be an act. An act is different from a belief. It's really not that hard to understand.

Yes, but opinions lead to acts - that was my point in that paragraph. It's really not that hard to understand.

According to your reasoning, you are prejudice if you hold a thought/belief. So given the emboldened statement above you are advocating that people should be arrested for their thoughts? Seriously?

Can you not see the parallels here with your viewpoints and dictatorships? That's what they do/did in some dictatorships (nazi germany, communist china etc.).

Where did I say people should be arrested for believing homosexuality is wrong? I didn't. I said something should be done about it - I didn't say what because I don't know what, but as long as there is inequality between people who harm nobody, something needs to be done about it. I need to decide what would be a fair course of action before I state what.

You're failing at seeing my point, or I might just be failing at English (Most likely since I'm still learning).

Other societies have values which are different from those of your society. Those values have very high intolerance to homosexuality (among other life styles) for good reasons (good as in their own sociocultural context). Something that might look harmless to you (within your own society) can very much be destructive to the identity of other societies. Labeling those values as discriminative/ignorant simply because they're different from your own, is very much what those people reject. They want to keep their own values, they want respect towards their own values.

I'll make my point a bit more simple: when it comes to this issue, there are no facts, there are opinions.

You're not failing at English - I actually couldn't tell that English isn't your first language :)

Now you've explained it further, I understand what you mean, but I think it's a silly way to look at the situation because it promotes the idea that people who hold prejudices are fine to think that way. What people perceive as harm is subjective; in regard to the people you have described, the only reason they believe homosexuals cause harm is because it goes against their strong beliefs, which are prejudice beliefs - they believe heterosexuality should be the only type of sexuality and their society has always held that belief highly; so, yes, you could say that homosexuals are harming them, because they are not following their irrational prejudice beliefs. However, to any rational person, homosexuals do not harm anybody. Please can you explain to me any way in which homosexuality harms anybody or society, apart from going against strong values or beliefs certain people hold?

So, to sum up; you are right, but to support prejudice people is to support prejudice.

[...]

It isn't just about person opinions, it's about what you do with them and how they influence your respect and treatment of others. If she's going to get the "stamp of approval" from the university at a master's level to be a school counselor then she needs to show that she can put aside her personal opinions and truly do her best to help people no matter their situation.

I completely agree with this :) That was very well said.

I think what the university did is bull crap. A person has the right to view things the way they want to. I dont think she was "gay-bashing" but just having a strong view point on it. Think of it another way. Lets say you opened a fertility clinic and a gay couple came to you and said they wanted a child. You have every right to refuse them if you dont feel its going to be in the best interest of the child. All you can do is refer them to someone who will do the precedure.

To refuse them on the grounds they are homosexual is immensely hateful and prejudice though - it shouldn't be allowed. There are laws to stop employees from not hiring a female simply because she is female and there should be similar laws to stop discrimination against homosexuals when it comes to adopting. A couple should be denied the right to adopt if it is not possible they can make fit parents. Logic tells one that a homosexual couple are capable parents, as much as a heterosexual couple are, as long as they raise the child well - provide it with a loving home, teach it right from wrong etc. Of course, this is getting more into a debate on homosexuality, rather than the topic of this thread, but you are free to discuss this in the official homosexuality thread with me or others :)

[Singh400]

+x to the Uni

[Darth Laidher]

Yes, but opinions lead to acts - that was my point in that paragraph. It's really not that hard to understand.

Where did I say people should be arrested for believing homosexuality is wrong? I didn't. I said something should be done about it - I didn't say what because I don't know what, but as long as there is inequality between people who harm nobody, something needs to be done about it. I need to decide what would be a fair course of action before I state what.

You're not failing at English - I actually couldn't tell that English isn't your first language :)

Now you've explained it further, I understand what you mean, but I think it's a silly way to look at the situation because it promotes the idea that people who hold prejudices are fine to think that way. What people perceive as harm is subjective; in regard to the people you have described, the only reason they believe homosexuals cause harm is because it goes against their strong beliefs, which are prejudice beliefs - they believe heterosexuality should be the only type of sexuality and their society has always held that belief highly; so, yes, you could say that homosexuals are harming them, because they are not following their irrational prejudice beliefs. However, to any rational person, homosexuals do not harm anybody. Please can you explain to me any way in which homosexuality harms anybody or society, apart from going against strong values or beliefs certain people hold?

So, to sum up; you are right, but to support prejudice people is to support prejudice.

I completely agree with this :) That was very well said.

To refuse them on the grounds they are homosexual is immensely hateful and prejudice though - it shouldn't be allowed. There are laws to stop employees from not hiring a female simply because she is female and there should be similar laws to stop discrimination against homosexuals when it comes to adopting. A couple should be denied the right to adopt if it is not possible they can make fit parents. Logic tells one that a homosexual couple are capable parents, as much as a heterosexual couple are, as long as they raise the child well - provide it with a loving home, teach it right from wrong etc. Of course, this is getting more into a debate on homosexuality, rather than the topic of this thread, but you are free to discuss this in the official homosexuality thread with me or others :)

Opinions some time leads to actions.Opinions do not lead to actions 100% of the time so thats not true calum.I think the uni is wrong for doing this and id love to slap the person that expelled her, but i'm not actually going to go and physically slap that person.

Id love to but in reality I wouldn't do it.

[James Riske]

The idiots at the university who came up with their unreasonable hatred and intolerance toward Jennifer should be fired immediately and then 'black-balled' from getting a job within 100 miles of the university.

Jennifer is 100% correct on all counts and should be given a medal for standing up against these hateful and intolerant lunatics.

[Calum Veteran]

Opinions some time leads to actions.Opinions do not lead to actions 100% of the time so thats not true calum.I think the uni is wrong for doing this and id love to slap the person that expelled her, but i'm not actually going to go and physically slap that person.

Id love to but in reality I wouldn't do it.

I'm fully aware of that; I didn't state they always lead to actions. My statement left it open to 'always' or 'sometimes', but I thought I didn't need to state common sense and place the term 'often' or 'sometimes' in there.

[HSoft]

Yes, but opinions lead to acts - that was my point in that paragraph. It's really not that hard to understand.

Not all the time it doesn't. So yes, hard to understand why you cannot differentiate between act and belief.

Where did I say people should be arrested for believing homosexuality is wrong? I didn't. I said something should be done about it - I didn't say what because I don't know what, but as long as there is inequality between people who harm nobody, something needs to be done about it. I need to decide what would be a fair course of action before I state what.

OK granted you didn't say what should be done but the basis is still there. You are saying that you want something done to people because of their thoughts/beliefs just like they do in dictatorships. You want to control people's thoughts/beliefs. That's not very "liberal" of you.

but I think it's a silly way to look at the situation because it promotes the idea that people who hold prejudices are fine to think that way.

Once again you are saying that you want to control what people think. What you are advocating is far more harmful than the agenda you are trying to push and yet you do not seem to see that.

[Calum Veteran]

The idiots at the university who came up with their unreasonable hatred and intolerance toward Jennifer should be fired immediately and then 'black-balled' from getting a job within 100 miles of the university.

Jennifer is 100% correct on all counts and should be given a medal for standing up against these hateful and intolerant lunatics.

Stand up against hate and intolerance, whilst at the same time telling all homosexuals to leave the crowd who are listening to her stand? ;)

[Darth Laidher]

I'm fully aware of that; I didn't state they always lead to actions. My statement left it open to 'always' or 'sometimes', but I thought I didn't need to state common sense and place the term 'often' or 'sometimes' in there.

But why state it then when there is some doubt to it.The university is the ones to blame here not the woman.You and I may not agree with what she believes in but who cares,Let her job performance tell the tale of how she does things not because of what some biased professor thinks.Give the woman a chance before condemning her.

I'm not a liberal but obviously you are, If I was hiring people and you came in for a interview and me knowing you were a liberal should I dismiss you just because you're a liberal.No I shouldn't just because this woman is a Christian gives them no right to pre-judge her job performance.

[Solid Knight]

Stand up against hate and intolerance, whilst at the same time telling all homosexuals to leave the crowd who are listening to her stand? ;)

She'd be right to do so. The only good homosexual is a straight homosexual. /s

[Aaron Veteran]

I don't think that your personal opinions on religion would affect things in that situation. In fact, if you were learning about the history of religions and their impact on society from an objective standpoint, being an Atheist might actually be a benefit.

Now, if you went out on an archaeological dig that was deemed historically significant and you purposefully started smashing precious historical artifacts that were related to religion because you think that anything to do with religion should be destroyed, then that would be a problem.

It isn't just about person opinions, it's about what you do with them and how they influence your respect and treatment of others. If she's going to get the "stamp of approval" from the university at a master's level to be a school counselor then she needs to show that she can put aside her personal opinions and truly do her best to help people no matter their situation.

She hasn't done anything with those opinions yet, and that is my biggest issue. Opinions CAN lead to acts is not equivalent to opinion DO lead to acts.

[Hell-In-A-Handbasket]

There are plenty of liberal professors out there that voice their views all the time so its fundamentally wrong to dismiss someone else's views just because you don't agree with them.

So a student goes to the counselor for help coping with a problem, your fine with the councilor telling the student that they are wrong and it's morally wrong to cope with the problem, as the problem should not exist and they should live the life of " insert counselors religion here"

She has stated and argues her beliefs in class, and said that she is not going to change them even PROFESSIONALLY, her personal believes and professional believes are the same. Literally it seems she wanted to be a counselor to be an in school preacher

[Darth Laidher]

So a student goes to the counselor for help coping with a problem, your fine with the councilor telling the student that they are wrong and it's morally wrong to cope with the problem, as the problem should not exist and they should live the life of " insert counselors religion here"

She has stated and argues her beliefs in class, and said that she is not going to change them even PROFESSIONALLY, her personal believes and professional believes are the same. Literally it seems she wanted to be a counselor to be an in school preacher

The thing is you're assuming she would say that.Let her job performance tell the tale, if she goes out of her way to say provocative things then get rid of her.But what you're saying now is only speculation. Speculation means jack ****.

I don't understand what the problem is. Isn't it innocent in till proven guilty.She said somethings in class but thats not her job she doesn't get paid to go to class.

[HSoft]

Stand up against hate and intolerance...

What I find quite funny is that you want tolerence from everyone with regards to your agenda (and that's fine. I have no problem with people being gay) but from your comments and statements you have made in this thread it is fairly obvious that you are completely intolerent of what other people believe/think if it does not match your agenda.

Pot: "Hello Kettle, your black"

[Stetson]

She hasn't done anything with those opinions yet, and that is my biggest issue. Opinions CAN lead to acts is not equivalent to opinion DO lead to acts.

She expressed inappropriate opinions for a professional setting/environment. If she says those things around her university classmates and professors, what's to say that she won't talk about them with staff at a future workplace? Even if she doesn't express them in front of the children directly, she might be overheard if she has a habit of expressing those opinions in a professional setting.

[Darth Laidher]

She expressed inappropriate opinions for a professional setting/environment. If she says those things around her university classmates and professors, what's to say that she won't talk about them with staff at a future workplace? Even if she doesn't express them in front of the children directly, she might be overheard if she has a habit of expressing those opinions in a professional setting.

People say all kinds of rude and inappropriate things in professional settings just now its a bad thing because some one is a Christian? Counselors are not goody goodies i'm sure they can get rude at times when they aren't in front of people.

Hell why don't we get a rope and hang her from the highest tree while we're at it for crying out loud.

[Aaron Veteran]

So a student goes to the counselor for help coping with a problem, your fine with the councilor telling the student that they are wrong and it's morally wrong to cope with the problem, as the problem should not exist and they should live the life of " insert counselors religion here"

She has stated and argues her beliefs in class, and said that she is not going to change them even PROFESSIONALLY, her personal believes and professional believes are the same. Literally it seems she wanted to be a counselor to be an in school preacher

She is going for a Master's in Ed in School Counseling. She is NOT going to be a mental health counselor. The vast majority of her issues that she will deal with are academic in nature. If a person is suffering from severe depression due to his/her adjustment issues related to being gay she will most likely refer that person to a REAL counselor.

You guys seriously don't understand what this lady will be doing professionally. I think you have an over exaggerated idea of what she would be doing. If she even starts to proselytize on school grounds guess what? She'd be fired by the next day. Period.

[Starfire13]

Keep in mind, guys, that believing gay/lesbian marriage is wrong does NOT have to mean hating gays/lesbians. Either way, I think we know too little details to really say who's in the wrong here. But I do consider this worrying. If the positions were reversed, everyone would be on her side, wouldn't they?

You can't choose whether or not someone deserves to air their opinion based on whether you agree with them.

[Aaron Veteran]

She expressed inappropriate opinions for a professional setting/environment. If she says those things around her university classmates and professors, what's to say that she won't talk about them with staff at a future workplace? Even if she doesn't express them in front of the children directly, she might be overheard if she has a habit of expressing those opinions in a professional setting.

Got it. We should as a practice deny people education and employment if they hold opinions that may be offensive regardless of what that person has actually done.

[Calum Veteran]

Not all the time it doesn't. So yes, hard to understand why you cannot differentiate between act and belief.

But it does some of the time (possibly even most of the time); why risk it when the consequential act could be very dangerous? E.g. Ugandans executing homosexuals for no reason other than being with the person they love and having sex with that person. I do understand the difference between act and belief and I have already shown that by stating that beliefs can lead to actions (that statement in itself shows there is a difference between the two; surely you understood that?).

OK granted you didn't say what should be done but the basis is still there. You are saying that you want something done to people because of their thoughts/beliefs just like they do in dictatorships. You want to control people's thoughts/beliefs. That's not very "liberal" of you.

It is when those thoughts and beliefs could lead to actions which harm people. Have you heard of J.S. Mill's 'harm principle'? Granted, these beliefs don't always result in actions which cause harm, but they could (and have in Uganda) and that is why I believe something needs to be done - that belief of mine is influenced by the harm principle. Uganda now wish to execute people for having homosexual sex and will certainly lock them in jail for it - where does it stop? Those actions stemmed from their beliefs and they are now irrationally harming people. Do you believe homosexuals deserve to be executed or jailed for having homosexual sex? Do you believe heterosexuals should?

Once again you are saying that you want to control what people think. What you are advocating is far more harmful than the agenda you are trying to push and yet you do not seem to see that.

Of course I don't see it because it's not true. I've not said that I want to control what people say at all; please read my posts. I've said that something needs to be done to stop the hatred people promote, but I haven't said what - that does not mean I wish to control what they say. I can't think of anything which can be done, without controlling them, but I haven't stated they should be controlled. Bringing up further ideas though (read: 'ideas' not 'opinions of mine'), do you not think the world would be a much better place with no sufferring and full equality? I really believe it would be and I'm thinking (read 'thinking' not 'believing' or 'subscribing to the opinion that') that controlling what people say - when they preach hate - could well lead to that kind of society - eliminate hatred, but not good and kindness.

Again, please understand - these are just ideas; I don't yet see a workable way of ensuring that kind of society without restricting the freedoms of those who promote hatred; I don't even know whether that would result in the kind of society I dream of.

But why state it then when there is some doubt to it.

There is no doubt that beliefs can sometimes (and often do) lead to actions. Uganda and their 'anti-homosexuality bill' is proof of that.

The university is the ones to blame here not the woman.You and I may not agree with what she believes in but who cares,Let her job performance tell the tale of how she does things not because of what some biased professor thinks.Give the woman a chance before condemning her.

I'm not a liberal but obviously you are, If I was hiring people and you came in for a interview and me knowing you were a liberal should I dismiss you just because you're a liberal.No I shouldn't just because this woman is a Christian gives them no right to pre-judge her job performance.

You make a good point. I'm not really sure I've decided whether I agree with the university on this one or not.

She'd be right to do so. The only good homosexual is a straight homosexual. /s

Haha :D

[HSoft]

Something else that nobody here has wrote about yet is what happens if she doesn't go into that particular field?

How many people who get their degree actually end up in the same field that they got their degree in?

I know it doesn't say in the article and therefore is just conjecture, but it's the same conjecture from those defending the university saying she will be counseling gays/lesbians.

[Stetson]

Got it. We should as a practice deny people education and employment if they hold opinions that may be offensive regardless of what that person has actually done.

I didn't say anything about holding an opinion. Hold all the opinions you want. Did I say anything was wrong with her having her opinions?

But she didn't just hold her opinions. She did something. She expressed her opinions in an inappropriate setting.

Nobody can do anything at all if you hold the opinion that people from X part of the world are inferior to people from Y part of the world. You could personally hold the opinion that segregation was great and the the removal of slavery destroyed this country. Hold that opinion all you want. Expressing it in a professional setting is still the wrong thing to do.

[argonite]

If she has expressed a distinct hatred towards certain kind of people that are considered acceptable members in our society, and that hate goes beyond a simple misaimed joke or unprofessional outburst, she should not be allowed to continue in the university.

[Aaron Veteran]

Something else that nobody here has wrote about yet is what happens if she doesn't go into that particular field?

How many people who get their degree actually end up in the same field that they got their degree in?

I know it doesn't say in the article and therefore is just conjecture, but it's the same conjecture from those defending the university saying she will be counseling gays/lesbians.

That is what I have been saying... she may never even work in the education field, maybe she just wants the accomplishment and knowledge? Who cares!? If she acieves the educational requirements laid forth by the department she should get her damn diploma. Her personal opinions didn't get her failing marks and that is ALL that should be taken into account. Her POSSIBLE future work ability is of ZERO consequence to the school.

My wife and I both have our Master's in Psychology and she presently works within the State of GA as a "real" counselor. In addition to her degree, she had to pass a license exam with the State. That is what qualifies her to perform her duties. Same with this lady. She would need to become licensed as a Teacher (if she isn't already) and THAT is what qualifies her to work. NOT HER ****ING DIPLOMA! If she meets the requirements for graduation (grades, assignments, thesis, etc) then she has earned her diploma and ought to get it.

[Aaron Veteran]

I didn't say anything about holding an opinion. Hold all the opinions you want. Did I say anything was wrong with her having her opinions?

But she didn't just hold her opinions. She did something. She expressed her opinions in an inappropriate setting.

Nobody can do anything at all if you hold the opinion that people from X part of the world are inferior to people from Y part of the world. You could personally hold the opinion that segregation was great and the the removal of slavery destroyed this country. Hold that opinion all you want. Expressing it in a professional setting is still the wrong thing to do.

Yes, she didn't HOLD it in. I never thought you'd think I meant "hold" in that manner. I meant "hold" as in possess or have. At any rate, from the article I fail to see where she said gays were inferior - but rather that they are religiously wrong and it is a chosen lifestyle. Show me again how that is a radical position. Mind you, I personally 100% DISAGREE WITH HER. However, I do think that she has a right to hold have those opinions and even express them in a open learning environment.

Universities should be a place of wide diversity of opinions, and clearly Albany State Ed. Dept. disagrees.

[HSoft]

I do understand the difference between act and belief and I have already shown that by stating that beliefs

I seriously don't think you get it. Stating a belief is an act.

Do you believe homosexuals deserve to be executed or jailed for having homosexual sex?

I don't but what if I said yes. If I don't do anything about it whats the harm? Again there's a big difference between thought/belief and action.

Of course I don't see it because it's not true. I've not said that I want to control what people say at all; please read my posts. I've said that something needs to be done to stop the hatred people promote.

I have read your posts, and infact I have re-read them just to make sure and no you didn't say anything about stoping the hatred people promote because in the discussions so far "people" haven't been promoting hatred. We've been talking about what people think/believe and you quite clearly stated

I see what you're saying about opinions and not labelling them as ignorant - it makes sense - but when somebody is prejudice against those who harm nobody in society, is that really right? Shouldn't something be done to prevent that?

There is nothing there about promoting hatred at all. It's about what people think/believe and just because some people may not agree/believe in your agenda you want to, in some way not specified yet :rofl: , control their actions/beliefs/thoughts.

It's fairly apparent that you want tolerence but are fairly incapable of it yourself to others.