A judge has ruled that Fuller Theological Seminary can expel students who have engaged in extramarital activity or have entered a same-sex marriage, and still receive federal funding.
Two former students expelled for being in same-sex marriages filed suit against the California-based evangelical school, claiming that the standards violated Title IX Civil Rights law.
United States District Judge Consuelo Marshall granted Fuller’s motion to dismiss the suit on Wednesday, ruling that the seminary met the standards for a religious exemption to Title IX.
“Here, although the text of the Religious Organization Exemption may be read to require the ‘religious organization’ and ‘educational institution’ to be two separate entities, the ordinary meaning of the term ‘organization’ is sufficiently broad to include [Fuller’s] board of directors,” wrote Marshall.
“… the Title IX claim seeks to hold FTS liable for expelling Plaintiffs for entering same-sex marriages, which are contrary to the school’s religious tenets. Thus, the Religious Organization Exemption applies.”
Daniel Blomberg, senior attorney at the Becket Fund, a law firm that specializes in religious liberty cases and which represented Fuller, celebrated the district court ruling in a statement released Thursday.
“This is a huge win for seminaries, yeshivas, madrasas, and every other religious institution of higher education,” stated Blomberg.
“That’s because houses of worship, and not government officials, should be deciding how to teach the next generation of religious leaders.”
“Defendants discriminated against Mrs. Maxon based on her sexual orientation because it expelled Mrs. Maxon for entering into a civil same-sex marriage,” read the suit, a copy of which was emailed to The Christian Post at the time.
“Defendants also discriminated against Mrs. Maxon based on her sex and sexual orientation by subjecting her to stricter disciplinary action than Fuller would have subjected a male, heterosexual student….”
The above comes from an Oct. 9 story on the Christian Post.
Hurrah, this is a victory for religious freedom! This institution’s religious tenets are well known, and it is most disingenuous of these two former students to cry foul after they, not the institution, violated the precepts. This is a judicial ruling that Catholics and others of good will should celebrate!
Why do so many of those types all look stereotypically the same? You can pick them out in a crowd. Pic taken in her green Subaru, no doubt.
Kevin T so very true….
I find it quite liberal of you to accept protestant theology.
Dona, possibly you misunderstand, more probable that you enjoy a bit of snark, but kudos to the protestants for doing the right thing in this situation and winning. That does not mean their theology is accepted, just that they were right in this particular instance. Kyrie Eleison!
Kristin, I love the Greek response! I too wondered who Dona thought was accepting Protestant theology. Shouldn’t any type of seminary or religious institution be allowed to hold its moral standards? As the attorney noted, this applies to Jews, Muslims and people of any religion.
Which protestant theology is that?
Appeals, anyone? What might the ‘Supremes’ have to say if this ball ever makes it to their court?
If Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court, she’ll help solidify the opinions of those who know the Constitution provides for religious liberty. No one, including those two students, is required to attend Fuller Theological Seminary. Sadly, there are seminaries that embrace homosexual activism. Those students are free to attend such a seminary. I attended some classes at Fuller, but, like the other students, was not required to; I chose to. Their community standards are well known. See https://www.fuller.edu/about/mission-and-values/community-standards/ If they objected, they could’ve attended another graduate school.
(And, notice, these lawsuits are virtually always directed against Christian organizations. No one has sued a Muslim bakery for not making a gay “wedding” cake.)
America was founded primarily by Bible-believing Protestants who desired that good people of all nationalities and religions be free to settle here. Today, almost all of America’s traditional, mainline Protestant denominations have abandoned the Bible and Christian morality, embracing extremely corrupt, babyish, secular, demonic “hippie immorality,” under the false guise of “tolerance,” “inclusivity,” and “non-discrimination.” Sorry, you must “discriminate” against sin and be “intolerant” and “non-inclusive” of sin. All evil is Satanic and highly destructive. An extremely corrupt, immoral nation, led by corrupt, Bible-denying, near-demonic religious houses of worship is headed for extreme peril, destruction, and death and a future in Hell. Such a filthy, perverted, corrupt nation of “Sodom and Gomorrah,” as well as all other filthy sexual sins (pornography, shacking-up and baby killing/abortion!) cannot stand, before God. Repentance is a must or face utter destruction. The errant former Fuller student is called to repentance by a Loving God, Who sent His only Son to die on a cross for her salvation.
Shouldn’t be federal funding of such in the first place. That and a return to freedom of association and voila: Liberty. MAFA!
Unfortunately, the federal government took over student loans. So, do we agree that student loans should come from private institutions?
Do you also oppose the GI Bill, which allows veterans to attend the college of their choice, even if it’s a private, even religious, college?
1. Agreed.
2. No.
Why don’t you oppose that aspect of the GI Bill?
That is providing federal tax dollars for education, sometimes even a religious education, to which you stated objection.
(I have no objection to GI Bill monies being used for private, even Christian, education, but am trying to understand your logic.).
One is redistribution, the other a military perk.
Apples and oranges – or Hiltons and Kardashians. ☺
Fair enough. But, it’s still “federal funding.” I do appreciate the distinction and concur with you.