Religion
Related: About this forumAppeals Court Says University Can Require Religious Student To Follow Ethics Rules
The Religious Rights rigid mindset dictates that its adherents can do things on their own terms no matter what the law or anyone else says. As a student at a Georgia university and the Alliance Defense Fund recently discovered, federal courts dont support that mentality. Jennifer Keeton was pursuing an advanced degree in counseling at Augusta State University until it became clear that she intended to impose her religious beliefs on clients in violation of the professional standards of her academic program.
According to the Associated Press, Keeton said homosexuality is immoral, unnatural and a lifestyle choice that can be fixed through conversion therapy. She said she would have difficulty working with gay clients.
School officials said professional ethics required her to treat all patients fairly and in accord with accepted counseling standards. The school put her on a remediation plan. When she refused to follow the plan and lost her first court case in which she argued that she was a victim of religious discrimination and that her free speech rights were being violated, she was expelled from Augusta State. Had the university allowed Keeton to violate the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics, the school could have lost its accreditation.
Keeton and her Alliance Defense Fund-provided attorneys appealed the initial ruling, but last week a federal appellate court rejected their claims. In Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley, a three-judge panel from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Augusta States action.
http://au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/victory-in-georgia-appeals-court-says-university-can-require-religious
From the decision:
http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/201013925.pdf
We conclude that the evidence in this record does not support Keetons claim that ASUs officials imposed the remediation plan because of her views on homosexuality. Rather, as the district court found, the evidence shows that the remediation plan was imposed because she expressed an intent to impose her personal religious views on her clients, in violation of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Code of Ethics, and that the objective of the remediation plan was to teach her how to effectively counsel GLBTQ clients in accordance with the ACA Code of Ethics.
Just as a medical school would be permitted to bar a student who refused to administer blood transfusions for religious reasons from participating in clinical rotations, so ASU may prohibit Keeton from participating in its clinical practicum if she refuses to administer the treatment it has deemed appropriate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And REASON for the WIN! Hooray!
uriel1972
(4,261 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)No matter how much both the religious nuts on the Right and the postmodernist nuts on the Left say otherwise.
Just because you think gay people are mentally ill and are in need of "conversion therapy" doesn't make it true.