 |
| An LGBTQ rally outside YU earlier this year (Jewish Press) |
One of the victories achieved for religious rights in the recent past was when former President Trump appointed 3 conservative justices to the Supreme Court. Which gave the court a 6 – 3 conservative majority. I believe this will result in better protection of religious rights. The recent leak of possible reversal of Roe V Wade is as example of that. Even though I am in favor of keeping abortion legal (for reasons beyond the scope of this post) the potential reversal shows that religious values still have standing.
Abortion rights are not the only issue impacted by the makeup of the Court. So too is the issue of LGBTQ rights versus religious rights. The latest of which involved a dispute between the civil rights of the LGBTQ community and YU (Yeshiva University). From the Forward:
A judge ruled Tuesday that Yeshiva University must formally recognize an LGBTQ student group, handing victory to advocates who said the school’s failure to foster an inclusive environment on campus amounted to discrimination.
Judge Lynn Kotler of the New York County Supreme Court ruled that YU was in violation of the New York City Human Rights Law by denying recognition and equal accommodations to the YU Pride Alliance, whose members brought the suit last April.
She ordered the university to immediately grant the YU Pride Alliance “full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges afforded to all other student groups” at the school.
Her ruling rejected the university’s claim that it is a religious corporation, and therefore exempt from the city’s nondiscrimination laws. Kotler wrote that YU’s own descriptions of itself — in its charter, public messaging and applications for state funding — deem it an educational institution that must abide by these laws.
“Yeshiva is either a religious corporation in all matters or it is not,” Kotler wrote.
Furthermore, citing precedent, the judge held that forcing YU to recognize the Pride Alliance did not violate the school’s First Amendment rights because “formal recognition of a student group does not equate to endorsement of that group’s message.”
The lower courts obviously still have plenty of liberal justices that rule in favor civil rights over religious rights. I hope that YU appeals that decision all the way up to the supreme Court if necessary. The majority conservative justices there will hopefully reverse Judge Kotler’s decision.
First let me reiterate what I have said what seems like a million times. Which is that LGBTQ people deserve to be treated with the same dignity that all other human beings are. Having been created B’Tzelem Elokim - in the image of God.
People that have same sex attractions cannot help who they are attracted to. And those who sincerely believe they were born the wrong gender are not doing so to be difficult. They are usually in great emotional pain. Depression is common and Suicides are very high in the LGBTQ community.
Any attempt to ridicule or in any way put them down is a cruelty that no human being should ever inflict on another human being. Those who do may very well be responsible for the death of an LGBTQ person by suicide!
However, treating LGBTQ people with respect and compassion is a far cry from normalizing that lifestyle. LGBTQ activists seek complete equity in all respects of a lifestyle conducive to behavior the bible considers to be worthy of execution by a Beis Din if they were warned by two witnesses
If one respects the values of the bible (and the Quran for Muslims) - which all believing Jews, Christians, and Muslims do - one cannot support the normalization of a lifestyle that rejects those values. Placing an imprimatur on an organization that normalizes sinful behavior is a rejection of those values.
With respect to YU, a conservative judge could have easily ruled in YU’s favor.
Judge Kotler’s argument that YU is not a religious corporation but an educational institution is a false dichotomy. It is both. That it is religious is inherent in its very name. A Yeshiva by definition is a religious institution. That its charter says it is an educational institution does not contradict that. Religion and education are not mutually exclusive.
Denying equal accommodations to an LGBTQ to form a student organization is an extension of their religious rights. Rights which dictate that an organization whose members see sinful behavior as perfectly fine ought not to be supported. Their individual rights are not being denied in any way.
Her second argument is that allowing LGBTQ people to have their own student organization with all rights and privileges granted to other student organization does not necessarily mean they endorse their message. Thus, says Judge Kotler, YU's religious values are not contradicted by accommodating them
Don’t they though? If they are given equal rights and privileges to – say - a weekly Chaburah of Lomdei Torah, what is the onlooker to think the message is if they are both treated the same way? Who is she kidding?
Like I said, I hope this decision is appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court if necessary and that the conservative justices there see fit to honor the rights of religious institutions who wish to implement policies that reflect their values. Not policies that contradict them.