Consequences of New Anti-discrimination Rules

Consequences of New Anti-discrimination Rules

Discrimination is a buzzword that has all kinds of implications. Of course, we don’t want to be accused of discriminating against someone based on race or gender. However, the federal government has gone far beyond those categories and has gotten into areas involving morality. So what are the consequences of new anti-discrimination rules?

In February of 2021, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development issued a directive barring discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity. For schools and colleges, this means that dorm rooms, locker rooms, shower spaces, and restrooms must be open to anyone, no matter their gender or sexual orientation. Schools not following the directive face fines and criminal penalties. 

We are already seeing the consequences of new anti-discrimination rules in high schools where boys are demanding to use girls’ locker rooms and participate in girls’ sports. A more complex situation is confronting Christian colleges because of moral concerns. They can be threatened with government action if they have a girls’ dorm or a boys’ dorm. 

The College of the Ozarks near Branson, Missouri, is involved in a court battle. This school, affiliated with the Presbyterian Church USA, was established in 1906. It has 1426 students and 30 academic majors. The college’s five-fold mission is to encourage academic, Christian, cultural, vocational, and patriotic growth in its students. With the help of Alliance Defending Freedom, the school is challenging the new government rules. 

The federal government has taken the Civil Rights Act of 1968 as the basis of its directive. That law was written to stop discrimination against African Americans, but they are reinterpreting it to accommodate LGBTQ activists. The consequences of new anti-discrimination rules for Christian colleges will be to open all dorms to everyone. An alternative would be to close the dorms and force students to find off-campus housing, which would be a financial hardship for the schools. Christian colleges across the nation are watching what happens in this court battle. 

— John N. Clayton © 2021

Reference: Faith and Justice magazine for August 2021, pages 10-17, and College of the Ozarks website. You can also read more about the case of College of the Ozarks v. Biden HERE.

Harvard Hypocrisy Evident

Harvard Hypocrisy at their Gate
Yesterday we reported on Harvard University’s policy of forcing women’s organizations to either accept men or be driven out of existence. They are doing that to be “gender neutral.” Now we are learning about more Harvard hypocrisy.

On October 16, 2018, the Wall Street Journal published an article by William McGurn titled “What Hillsdale Can Teach Harvard.” The article documents Harvard’s discrimination against Asian-Americans. To conform to federal guidelines, Harvard is requiring higher SAT scores and adding personality traits like “kindness” and “likability” to justify the exclusion of Asian-Americans.

Hillsdale College here in Michigan has forgone federal grants and aid. In that way, it can ignore federal requirements on programs and enrollment policies. Harvard receives millions of federal dollars each year by conforming to federal guidelines for its courses and admissions. McGurn quotes a Harvard defense of their SAT and psychological requirements:

“This case involves a private university, which has a weighty academic-freedom interest, protected by the First Amendment, in choosing its students, and in determining how they are educated (including through the judgment about the educational benefits flowing from a diverse student body).”

Larry Arnn, the president of Hillsdale College, has said, “Any time anyone from Harvard would like to see how a college can maintain its autonomy and its values, our door is open.

In past years we have reported on cases were Christian students at Harvard were pressured to reject their Christian beliefs in order to stay in school. Yesterday we quoted the administration’s commitment to “making Harvard a campus for all of its students.” Harvard’s hypocrisy and its 39-billion-dollar endowment seem to dictate what students have to do and believe to be accepted.
–John N. Clayton © 2018