Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Again, the important things to note are the belief that sexual intimacy is reserved for marriage, that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that it is intended for enjoyment and procreation. There is a lot in here that I do not affirm, but by the same token, it is important to note that AT NO POINT DOES THE COMMUNITY COVENANT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THE PRACTICE OF HOMOSEXUAL INTIMACY. It DOES discriminate equally against ALL SEXES and EVERY SEXUAL ORIENTATION in that the monition is against all forms of extramarital sexual intimacy.
I will agree that the Community Covenant is puritanical with respect to its views of sexual activity, but it is virtually silent concerning sexual orientation, and for good reason. The University and its legal team understands that it cannot legislate belief, nor can it discriminate against race, religion, gender and sexual preference, etc. To that end, the TWU student body is composed of mostly evangelical Christians, but also includes Mormons, Catholics, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and atheists. To suggest that proponents of same sex relationships are being unfairly targeted by this agreement is to exaggerate both the intent and the content of the document in question. I agree that there is an implicit denunciation against same sex marriage in TWU's definition of marriage, and that is a matter of some concern. However, this is an entirely different matter than what is being claimed. Yes, the TWU Community Covenant does "request a commitment to refrain from same-sex intimacy," but this is in line with its request for a commitment to refrain from ALL extramarital sexual intimacy—be it heterosexual or homosexual—while enrolled at TWU.
|
Although, in some circumstances, a heterosexual person's decision not to marry may be a deeply personal one, is there not still a critical distinction between that unmarried heterosexual person and a homosexual person who, according to TWU's Covenant, must aspire to a complete and everlasting physical denial of their sexuality, an unchangeable and deeply personal characteristic?
It doesn't pass my discrimination smell test. I would be curious to see it fully argued in front of a human rights tribunal or in court.