Friday, September 14, 2007

I have not posted much lately mostly because this is A. the beginning of the school year and life gets rather hectic around now and B. I just found out that I have diabetes and thus have become the petri dish for a number of medical professionals.

However there is an article in Inside Higher Ed today that once again reminds me that far to many people put their brains in neutral once they are appointed to the Federal Court System. Article, entitled Big Loss for Fraternities, explains how the U.S. Appeal Court in New York (the Second Circuit) overturned the district courts decision that the College of Staten Island could not refuse to recognize a fraternity because it did not admit women. Under this ruling no gender exclusive social organization can exist on a college campus.

I was not a member of a fraternity in college, and actually, spent a great deal of time mocking those who were. That being said, they had every right to associate with those that they wished to associate with. And they still do. Hopefully the Supreme Court will inform the Court of Appeals that they should pull their heads out of their butts. This is the type of ruling that one would expect from the Ninth Circuit which is filled with utter nutjobs but it is said that this type of insanity seems to be infectious.


Blogger brad said...

OK, I'm going to play the contrarian again, and disagree with you. Under this ruling, if the university is so pig-headed as to adopt rules denying recognition to gender-specific organizations, that university is allowed to do so, even if it's a state school. Why should the federal government be telling a state university that it has to give money to a bunch of guys who like keggers? I don't recall reading that in my constitution. No one is telling the Frat that they can't exist, they're just telling them "no soup for you!" If I lived in New York, I don't know that I'd want my tax dollars going to frats, either.

Did you note that one of the judges on the panel is the guy who compared Bush to Hitler and Mussolini? Oh yeah, he apologized, and that's not the sum total of his essence; he (Calabresi) is actually a quite famous scholar, and one I appreciated reading in law school.

8:08 PM  
Blogger Mental Meanderings said...

The point is not the sacred right of keggers, the point is that if the fraternity is denied recognition all single gender organizations, whether male or female, will be thrown out. No women's support groups, no all male choirs, etc. etc. My objection was not that fraternities are swell, its that public institutions have to support the Constitution and the university and the mentally challenged members of the Second Circuit are denying these students their right of free association. The never ending PC crap has just got to stop somewhere.

12:25 PM  
Blogger brad said...

OK, let me put it this way -- do you feel that all organizations should be granted recognition? NAMBLA decides to open a campus chapter; do we allow them to meet on campus, pass out fliers, yadda yadda? I don't think so. Maybe you disagree.

OK, so if there has to be a line somewhere, who draws it? The administrators at the university, or a few unelected egomaniacs, also known as federal judges, who are only asked the question because somebody has way too much money to be paying lawyers in the first place?

Me? I'll stick with the administrators, because at least they can be replaced or overruled by the state legislature.

4:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home