Maybe. But I doubt it. Take Notre Dame, for example. It's student rule is this: "The University embraces the Catholic Church’s teaching that a genuine and complete expression of love through sex *requires a commitment to a total living and sharing together of two persons in marriage*. Consequently, students who engage in sexual union *outside of marriage* may be subject to referral to the University Conduct Process."
The University has not changed that rule since gay couples began to marry in larger numbers. And I doubt it will. It will likely just leave that rule in place, which is silent on the question of sexual orientation. Moreover, it is very unlikely that Notre Dame will take any disciplinary action against its students who are married to persons of the same sex: After all, my understanding is that it rarely, if ever, disciplines the thousands of its students that are having sex regularly. A school that is so concerned about its image that it puts out this video -- https://youtu.be/ca9bUC7jqAs -- is not about to start expelling its LGBT students who are lawfully married. On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Volokh, Eugene <vol...@law.ucla.edu> wrote: > Marty: I thought it was established that some colleges > forbid sex by students outside of marriage. I assume that this isn’t a > judgment about the civil law of adultery, but rather because they view such > sex as deliberate sin. If so, why *wouldn’t* they “extend such rules to > prohibit sex within a same-sex marriage”? Indeed, they’d probably just > say, “we prohibit sex within what we see as a theologically permitted > marriage,” which is to say opposite-sex marriage. > > > > Moreover, even if such universities are in practice > uninclined to look closely at students’ sex lives, wouldn’t such > universities be pretty unlikely to offer married student housing to > same-sex couples? > > > > Eugene > > > > *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto: > religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marty Lederman > *Sent:* Thursday, April 30, 2015 11:39 AM > *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > *Subject:* Re: Religious organizations, tax-exempt status and same-sex > marriage > > > > The more I think about the details of this, the more I'm inclined to agree > with Chip that the issue won't arise, even 20 years from now. > > > > After all, if there are few, if any, colleges in existence *today *that > discriminate > against gay students in any way, it's hard to see how there would be any > Bob Jones analogues around a couple of decades from now. > > > > What about in the context of employment? Well, Congress will enact ENDA > sometime in the next 20 years (perhaps much sooner). So that, in and of > itself, will get rid of employment discrimination, save for whatever the > ministerial exception exempts. The Court's judgment on SSM will have no > bearing on it at all. And the IRS will have no occasion to consider > withdrawing tax-exempt status, since there won't be any discrimination left > to consider. > > > > Am I missing anything? > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Ira Lupu <icl...@law.gwu.edu> wrote: > > Thanks, Marty, for that answer and for understanding my mis-written > question (I meant to ask "what do the rules permit different sex couples > to do that same sex couples may not do?", but I mangled it in the earlier > e-mail.) And I think Marty has identified the only likely discriminatory > rule at a religiously conservative college -- whether sex is permitted > between members of a different sex married couple but not members of a same > sex married couple (because I assume such schools prohibit intercourse of > any kind by unmarried students on campus.) > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 9:14 AM, Marty Lederman <lederman.ma...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I seriously doubt that any school has, or will have, a rule that prohibits > same-sex "dating," as such, akin to one of the Bob Jones prohibitions (set > out below). I'd also be surprised if any schools will refuse to admit, or > will expel, students who are gay, or who are "partners" in a SSM (again, > akin to Bob Jones). Several schools, however -- Notre Dame included -- > have rules generally prohibiting students from having sex outside of > marriage. I wonder whether any of those schools will extend such rules to > prohibit sex within a SSM, thus creating a facial discrimination. > > _______________________________________________ > 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.
