I think Steve Sanders for his post. I agree that the fact that the RA is an employee complicates this situation a little. However, it seems to me that this is just the type of discrimination that the Free Exercise Clause is designed to prevent. It is, of course, true that no one is required to accept a job as an R.A. If a person's religious beliefs preventing him or her from fulfilling some aspect of the job requirements, Free Exercise doctrine (and Title VII) would require the employer to make a reasonable accomodation, but only if the accomodation imposed no more than a trivial burdern. However, there appears to be no allegation that the RA is not fulfilling all job requirements.
This strikes me as a case of pure religious discrimination. The proffered reason that college students would not approach an RA who leads a Bible study for fear of being judged seems contrived. College students are adults, and in the highly speculative case that a student felt intimidated, there are doubtless other R.A.s, Assistant Deans of Students/Men/Women, counselors, infirmary staff, etc. The claim that this is designed to protect students seems incredulous.
I suspect this ban is limited to the Bible. If the fear truly was that students would feel intimidated, then a study of The Communist Manifesto by a Marxist student in his dorm room would certainly be forbidden. After all, Marx taught that the proletariat should rise up and kill the bourgeoise (probably at least half of the student body in most universities). Of course, no school would stop a Marxis RA from leading a voluntary study of The Communist Manifest, and advocating that one be killed is surely intimidating. Nor I suspect would UW forbid a Hindu RA from having a study of the Vedas in his room even though non-vegetarians (wild guess 90% of the student body) might be intimidated, or a Muslim student for leading a study of the Koran, even though a straightforward reading of the text condemns all women to hell. [I have read Islamic theology and I do realize that many Islamic theologians in the last century have interpreted the text in various ways that do not reach that result.]
I think it is highly unlikely that UW would ban a study of Marx, the Vedas, the Koran, or dozens of other texts (and certainly they should not). I confess to being something of a cynic, but this seems a blatant case of certainly anti-religious discrimination, and probably anti-Judeo-Christian discrimination. This seems to be just the type of situtation that both clauses of the freedom of religion provision of the First Amendment forbid.
Once again, I think Steve Sanders for his thoughtful post.
Steve Prescott
From: "Steve Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>
To: "'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'" <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>
Subject: RE: Bible study ban for RA's in UW-Eau Claire dorms
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 11:36:37 -0800
The point is, though, that this persons home is also state property, making it akin to professors classroom. If it were a different arrangement he came to the dorm for an 8-hour shift advising students, then went back to his own off-campus apartment obviously the university could not dictate what he did in his home during his off-time.
An RA at a public institution is a rather unique status: a state actor whose job requires that he live onsite, who is essentially on duty 24 hours a day (at least when hes on the premises), and who is compensated in the form of free housing for making this sacrifice of freedom and privacy.
We know from free-exercise doctrine that a university could decline to accommodate an RA whose religion required him to attend services or observe sabbath on a schedule that would impose unreasonable demands on fellow employees. And I imagine that under public employee speech doctrine, the university also could prohibit the RA from posting certain discriminatory social or political messages on his door messages that ordinary dorm residents would be more free to post.
There is, of course, no entitlement to a job as an RA; its usually at least somewhat selective. If an RA feels a clash of conscience between his special and demanding role and his desire to spend time spreading religious or other messages, he is free not to accept this particular employment.
Steve Sanders
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad M Pardee
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 8:53 AM
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Bible study ban for RA's in UW-Eau Claire dorms
To me, this ban seems rather difficult to justify. To say that an RA can't host a bible study in his home on campus is absurd. They try to say that the RA could host it off-campus, but "that if the studies continued, students might not find them 'approachable' or might fear they'd be 'judged or pushed in a direction that does not work for them.'" That's not a question of where the Bible study is held but rather whether the RA is hosting it. If a student is honestly going to feel an RA is "unapproachable" because they lead a Bible study in their dorm room, are they going to automatically view the RA as approachable if the RA leads the exact same study but in a different location? It strikes me as an illogical argument. I know that there are those here who have proposed that some of the excesses of educational institutions in limiting religious speech are grounded in either the fear of costly litigation or a mistaken believe that the limitations are required. I don't see either of those benign errors here, though.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/nov05/368030.asp
http://www.gazetteextra.com/bibleban110405.asp
Brad
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
