Christianity Today

Do InterVarsity members not vote on their leaders? This case has been very strangely construed as though Tufts must allow the group's constitution to state that they only accept certain kinds of Christians as leaders, or else the group will not be able to choose its own leaders. Having been involved with a variety of campus groups before, I am unsure of why a group's constitution needs to make explicit requirements for leaders if the members of the group choose who will lead them. I think this case is much less important than it is being made out to be, and that there is no reason the university ought not to be able to say that a group cannot have a policy of categorically excluding certain people from being leaders if the university is going to be funding the group. If the group were not allowed to exist at all if it refused to abide by university non-discrimination policies, or if it were targeted with rules not applied to other groups, that would be a different story entirely.

I agree with John Trott. I spent many years in campus ministry, primarily in IVCF. This just makes common sense. A group defined by it's religious belief system should not have to accede to those with dissenting belief systems within its own organization. Agreed too that IVCF fellowship's record on both race and women's rights is exemplary.

I think this decision is good news for both Christians and for those sick of the culture wars. Yes, we live in a pluralistic society and many of us (even Christians) welcome that fact. Yes, religious organizations are defined by -- surprise! -- their specific beliefs. It makes no sense at all for a group defined by belief to be forced to accept those not holding said belief as leaders -- especially when the belief(s) in question are not aimed at race, class, or gender but rather at the nature of God and humanity in the universe. There is a slippery middle in there re groups' beliefs rooted in bigotry. But IVCF? Their record re both race and women's rights is exemplary.

I wonder what would happen if I wanted to be a leader in a university pro-choice advocacy group. Would I be forced to adhere to its statement of faith? Would I be discriminated against because of my strong pro-life stance? Luckily in the TUFTS story, common sense will likely win out.

Fixed. Thanks!

I hate to nitpick, but isn't the word in your headline of this article supposed to be Nondiscrimination, not Nondiscrimation? What I think is a misspelling is all over this article, not just in the headline.