Skip to main content

statue of Jesus with hand to face
A student group at Boston College has, for years, distributed free condoms to students. Unfortunately that's now come into conflict with the Catholic institution's new obsession with fighting unauthorized sexytimes:
[L]ast month, Ms. Lennox and the other students involved in the effort received a letter from the administration, pressing them to stop. “The distribution of condoms is not congruent with our values and traditions,” read the letter, which was signed by Paul J. Chebator, the dean of students, and George Arey, the director of residential life.
Those values and traditions being the blanket presumption that college students do not have sex, I think, or perhaps just that such sex needs to be appropriately punished with herpes or pregnancy or the like.
“As a Jesuit, Catholic university, there are certain Catholic commitments that we are called to uphold, including the commitment not to publicly distribute condoms on our campus,” Jack Dunn, a spokesman for the college, said in an e-mail.
When I was in my very Catholic high school looking at which colleges I would apply to, I have a dim memory of thumbing through a pamphlet for Boston College in the career counselor's office. The Catholic counselor steered me off with a dismissive gesture. "Oh, that's a Catholic college," she said. "You're better than that."

Just throwing that out there, Mr. Dunn.

Both the “Sexually Transmitted Infections” and the “H.I.V./AIDS” sections of the college’s Web site say abstinence is the best way to prevent disease and do not mention forms of birth control.
The student's health section of the website also suggests that antibiotics are tools of the devil, and offers complimentary leeches for any students who properly feel that all good science ended when belief in bilious humours fell out of fashion.
The group’s actions have for years stirred opposition from the college’s more conservative students, some of whom have written letters to campus publications and, in 2011, held a demonstration in which they handed out packages of dental floss while the group distributed condoms.
Wow. Wow, I'm not touching that one. I knew that the Catholic idea of "abstinence" often required a breath mint afterwards, but … wow.
“To sort of be treated like either we’re not adults enough to provide for ourselves, or in some instance we’re animals that can’t control our passions, I think it’s degrading to the student body,” said Nathaniel Sanders, a Boston College senior.
Well fine, then, sport, glad to hear you've got your animal passions and/or health care needs under control. Good for you. But if you think even offering the option "degrades" other students, damn, you've got a fine career ahead of you as the archbishop of other people's bedrooms. Just make sure you stock up on dental floss.

I don't think there's any particular surprise in knowing that the new top-down obsession over sex extends even down to the college kids that have (willingly, mind you) subjected themselves to the New Catholic Sex Authority League, but a battle seemingly premised mainly around whether or not to even officially acknowledge that college students will be having safe-or-not-safe sex? Now that's a throwback.

Originally posted to Hunter on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 01:57 PM PDT.

Also republished by Sex, Body, and Gender and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The drugstore nearest to the campus (17+ / 0-)

    will be cheering this decision. Probably the Koch brothers as well. We wouldn't want to miss an opportunity to profit off the college students.

    It is also possible that there may also be more abortions. Because if there is one thing that is certain, there are not going to be fewer sexytimes as a result of Dean Wormer, er, Chebator's opinions.

  •  This has been the subject of previous diaries (10+ / 0-)

    Apparently, the students were distributing condoms out of a dorm room -- i.e., on university property -- and after being warned a number of times to stop as they were in violation of the principles of that Catholic institution (a Catholic institution they voluntarily chose after knowing it was a Catholic institution), and ignoring those warnings, the school has decided to take disciplinary action against the students.

    I am not outraged.  

    If you believe in Constitutional rights at all, then you have to believe that a Catholic institution has the right to run its religious institution in accordance with that religion.  That's their First Amendment right, after all.  

    No one has the "right" to go to a religious institution and say, "I don't believe in your religion, so your religious institution has to accommodate my beliefs that conflict with your religion."  

    If this were a PUBLIC university, of course, it would be an entirely different story.  But I believe in that religions have a right to operate their own institutions in accordance with what THEY see as their own religious beliefs.  Those who cannot live with the religious rules should choose another institution.

    •  Their sudden awakening is what's distasteful. (14+ / 0-)

      For years they have looked the other way in the interest of the health of their students. This goes for everything from student policies to their insurance for their employees, which for most of these institutions has included birth control for years and years.

      But now, as the Roman church has decided to push their 19th century message in the public square, they are having go back and change their policies within their institutions so they (in theory) won't look ridiculous.

      It's not working.

      •  Here's another diary (5+ / 0-)

        that goes into the other thing that's disgusting: the Boy Scout trick of being private and religious -- or a "de facto public institution" -- contingent on which flavor is to your advantage in the particular situation.

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

        This diary has more details on the Boston College condom-gate situation too.

        •  what are you talking about? (8+ / 0-)

          boston college is a private university. it is in no way a "de facto" public institution. they accept a small percentage of total applicants each year, and tuition and fees are well north of $45,000 per year. there is literally no way you could apply to, attend, or even take a tour of BC without realizing how strong its ties are to jesuit traditions in education.

          if you don't agree with catholic values, and dont want to abide by them, dont apply to, attend, and live on the campus of a private catholic university.

      •  The disciplinary action was not "sudden" (5+ / 0-)

        according to all the reports, they were warned several times to stop.

        If they were given no warning and suddenly subject to disciplinary action, you might have a point.  But a Catholic institution can decide it wants to enforce Catholic doctrine on the grounds of its institution (even if it has not previously been strict about enforcing that doctrine) without raising outrage from me.  

        People who cannot live with Catholic rules -- and there are LOTS of people who can't -- should choose another institution.  They do not have a right to expect the Catholic institution to look the other way when they are opening violating religious doctrine, no matter how ridiculous they think that religious doctrine is.

        •  agreed (9+ / 0-)

          I couldn't disagree with Catholic doctrine, in nearly every way, more than I do -- particularly with respect to reproductive issues.

          But we're not talking about a Catholic hospital, which enjoys the various financial benefits of it's status serving the public good, refusing to provide medical care based on religious doctrine. We're talking about a highly selective, very expensive private Catholic university -- a university that students need to put a great deal of effort and consideration into applying to for. This isn't an emergency room that you end up in after being raped, only to find that doctors won't provide you with Plan B. There should be no element of surprise here. No laws are being broken with respect to discrimination, either. The Catholic church has a basically medieval perspective on sex. It's what you sign up for. Especially they are not only your university of choice, but also your LANDLORD.

    •  Agreed, they should do it off-campus if possible (11+ / 0-)

      I went to Holy Cross, and this was the policy there as well.

      However, there were priests that pointed out that the church's teachings on birth control really only apply to married couples.  If you are having sex outside of marriage, you're already in a state of sin, the use of artificial means of birth control at that point doesn't make it worse.

      So, they would actually tell us that if you're going to sin and have pre-marital sex, don't be stupid, use a condom.

      Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

      by absdoggy on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 02:19:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Do it off-campus... (0+ / 0-)

        ...because no one fucks on-campus?

        •  its 2013 (5+ / 0-)

          im pretty sure college aged kids who can afford a $180,000 undergraduate education at a fairly elite university can figure out how to get condoms for themselves if they want to go bang a girl in their dorm room without having to rely on free handouts down the hall.

          not to mention the fact that BC is in no way censuring students for using condoms, or having sex. they simply consider the distribution of condoms ON THEIR PROPERTY to be an inherent endorsement of a way of life that violates some of their absolute core values.

          •  Yes, it's 2013... (5+ / 0-)

            ...and yet we still have a ton of idiots who think preventing safe sex will somehow prevent the sex.

            •  cool (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              coffeetalk

              how, exactly are they preventing safe sex from happening again?

              and if they're such idiots, of course, students can always opt no to go there. it's not like universities acquire their students through the draft or something.

              you're probably seems to be with catholicism in general. feel free to be old man yelling at cloud on that issue, but that really has nothing much to do with this situation. when in rome. . .

              •  My problem... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                wintergreen8694

                ...is with stupid people who think if they prevent people from having safe sex that it will keep people from having any sex, and that is the reasoning behind trying to prevent people from getting condoms and knowing how to use them. These people are beyond stupid.

                •  but (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  coffeetalk, VClib, Wisper

                  it's weird, then, that you're so angry about this since bc in no way prevents its students from purchasing, using, or possessing condoms.

                  and even if they were, it would have nothing to do with preventing people from having sex. it has to do with not encouraging acts that violate fundamental doctrinal tenets of a religious institutions. sex is not against the rules on the bc campus.

                  its fine, you can say it: you cant stand catholic doctrine, and it makes you angry. hell, i feel the same way. i dont agree with any of it, and i think its a bleak way to look at the world, which has little to do with whether or not a private university is entitled to enforce a code of conduct that gets at the very core of its reason for existing.

                •  Uhhh... (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Bailey2001, coffeetalk, VClib

                  "prevent people from getting condoms and knowing how to use them"

                  Dude... as stated earlier ... it's 2013.  If we now have schools wanting to teach kindergarteners about condoms, and elementary school students how to use them, I find your statement either completely asinine or just plain moronic.

                  If you find a college student who doesn't know how to use a condom and doesn't know how to procure them via their own means let me know.  You'll have discovered the "missing link" or found someone who literally has been living under a rock for the last 25 years.

                  Just another example of people blowing smoke because a religious institution decided to grow a pair and actually abide by their own beliefs and rules for once.  Doesn't matter that they've allowed it in the past.  The point is they can say that it's no longer allowed from this point forward.  

                  Even if their reasoning is as you state... that they are naive enough, or yes stupid enough, to think that by denying condoms to the students it's somehow going to prevent sex... it doesn't matter.  Their house, their rules.  Don't like it... move out.

                  •  Yes, some of those students are condom-naive. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    a2nite

                     Many have gone to Catholic Preschool, elementary, jr. high and high schools, where sexual education is a very limited part of the curriculum.   It is highly probable that at least a quarter of the students have never seen, touched, and even been advised about the details of condom usage.  

                    •  And who took it upon themselves to teach them? (0+ / 0-)

                      These are not children....would you suggest that they have never heard of a condom too?  If they want to know about them....I am certain they can go to any library in America or Google for that matter and be educated to their heart's content.

                      What if these young adults are practicing Catholics and simply are not interested? What about their rights to go to a private Catholic college that they are paying a pretty penny to attend?

                •  It is a private catholic university. If you are (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  VClib

                  unaware that handing out BC in the hallways and dorms of a private catholic university might be frowned upon....you may need to reconsider higher education in any regard.

                  Any private university can make any rules they feel like making....a 12 inch book of them, if they want.  The students either obey them or get out or don't go...period.

                  No one forced one single student  go there and honestly, no one is talking about the other students' rights who are probably a high percentage of catholic...who actually chose the college because they are catholic and might not want to be handed BC or it to be placed in their room because of their religious beliefs.  

                  •  I would guess that (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Ahianne

                    the number of students who chose BC because they are Catholic and don't want to be handed birth control or it to be placed in their room because of their religious beliefs could fit in one lecture room. Though the press dredges a couple up for each story by sending emails to the most conservative groups on the campus, I don't personally know anyone raised Catholic under 40 who holds those religious beliefs, and certainly not to that extent.

                    I was reading another forum about this recently and a bunch of BC grads from the last ten or fifteen years were saying that, if they're going to crack down on people who have sex and use condoms, they'll have about 50 people left at the school.

                    Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

                    by fenway49 on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 05:17:33 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You are totally missing the point. It doesn't (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      VClib

                      if it is only one student who feels that way.  It doesn't matter if every student in that school is not even Catholic.  All that matters is that the student chose to attend a private catholic school for their education.  It means they knew the rules, or if by some small chance they didn't....they have now been told and reminded.  

                      It is private property and a private school and those are the rules there.  If they want to hand out condoms, and they want to hand them out in the dorms of their chosen school...they are more than welcome to pack their bags, take their condoms and head down the road to University of Massachusetts, which is a public school, and hand them out to their heart's content.  

                      •  YOU are missing the point (0+ / 0-)

                        I have never said the school has no technical right to its rules (although I will note this particular "rule" appears nowhere in writing and practice on the campus has long gone the other way).

                        My point is that the rule, as currently being presented, is stupid and the defenses of it are wrong. Most defenders of the BC administration have cited the propriety of a "Catholic school" promoting "Catholic values." All I have said is that these are not my values, nor are they the values of any Catholics I know under the age of 60. If BC wants to double down on this stuff, over time more and more students will in fact take their bags down the road.

                        It is amazing, however, how many people on this site buy into the "they can do whatever they want on their private property" idea to the point of suggesting that their decisions can't even be criticized as stupid.

                        Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

                        by fenway49 on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 07:30:35 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  It's stupid to you and it may be stupid to a lot (0+ / 0-)

                          people....but to the administrators of that private school, it's not stupid.  That is all that matters in the scope of things.  

                          You can criticize it all you want, and call it stupid and dumb but in the scope of things, they have every legal right to do it.

                          The point of this discussion is that some of the participates in it believed that the students had the legal right to do what they did.  They don't... it is not a first amendment issue, there is no illegal behavior by the school and whether or not we feel it is stupid or not, the students were in the wrong. They chose that school, so they have to live by their rules.....stupid or not.

                          •  The point of the diary (0+ / 0-)

                            is that the policy is stupid and out of touch with the real world, including the way the school's mostly Catholic student body lives. The diarist himself noted that they chose to attend that school and said nothing about lawsuits or anything.

                            A few commenters have raised First Amendment issues. I am not among them. My only points have been that this "rule" is stupid and that, from personal experience, I know these "Sean O'Malley values" are not widely shared "Catholic values" among everyday people of college age. That's why I am not equating "at variance with this just-announced rule" and "in the wrong."

                            Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

                            by fenway49 on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 09:02:33 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I understand your point and so it is understood. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            VClib

                            It is a stupid rule since it doesn't apply in today's time and age.  

                            In my view, the rule is a rule of a private university and I feel that they have every right to have that rule.  

                            Personally, I wouldn't want to go to a school that had those type of rules and hence the reason I did not attend a Catholic school.   I also think the students who chose a private Catholic school for their higher education needs, shouldn't be surprised at all that handing out BC in the halls and dorms of a private Catholic school would be the least bit acceptable.  Matter of fact, I am almost certain they knew it was unacceptable.  If by some chance they didn't know... again, they do know now.  So should it happen again, they would undoubtedly be in the wrong.

      •  My Catholic boyfriend in college (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite

        must have had one of those priests.

        There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

        by Cali Scribe on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:54:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Holy Cross grad here too...n/t (0+ / 0-)

        "I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are." --Homer Simpson

        by dhshoops on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:46:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Why would that make any difference? There (0+ / 0-)

        is no reason the college can't require them to uphold Catholic values even off campus as well.

        You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

        by Throw The Bums Out on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 08:34:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  They have every right (4+ / 0-)

      ...not to hand out condoms to their students.  

      They do not OWN their students.  Employers do not OWN their employees.  

      A college does not have First Amendment rights.  A church does not have First Amendment rights.

      People do.  

      America, we can do better than this...

      by Randomfactor on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 02:28:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  News flash- people have sex (6+ / 0-)

      distributing condoms is not a crime.

      "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

      by Horace Boothroyd III on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 02:30:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Come to Boston College... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tonedevil, a2nite, schnecke21

      ...where your genitals become property of the church!

      •  good grief (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coffeetalk, shmuelman, Whatithink, Wisper

        this is why people can't stand political extremists.

        how about: come to boston college, the most prestigious catholic university in america, where, as an undergraduate, you are free to fuck whoever you want in any manner you like. just please refrain from using school property to also flagrantly endorse a lifestyle that completely flies in the face of everything the catholic tradition stands for. even still, when you do that, you will be warned many times before eventually receiving some sort of punishment that will very likely be relatively minor.

        or, you know

        WELCOME TO BC WHERE YOUR PENISES AND VAGINAS WILL BE ENSLAVED TO THE POPE BEFORE BEING STRIPPED OF ALL FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS IN SOME WAY THAT DOESNT EVEN MAKE SENSE!!!1!!!

        •  These people from Boston College... (2+ / 0-)

          ...who're freaking out over the existence of condoms are the political extremists.

          Safe sex is not a lifestyle. It's being safe. Only people who are delusional think that preventing safe sex will prevent sex. There have been exhaustive studies that prove such thinking to be absolutely, insanely wrong. If they actually cared about people, they'd want them to be safe, but instead they freak out because OMG condoms r from Satan!1!!

          •  No, political extremists are those who think (5+ / 0-)

            a religious institution that people voluntarily choose to attend  has no right to have rules saying that, while you are on their property, you can't completely flout your violation of their fundamental religious doctrine.

            That's political extremism -- saying a religion shouldn't have the right to practice its own religion on its own property with people who CHOOSE to be a part of that religious institution.  I can't think of a more extreme position than that.

            A reasonable view is that a religious institution that people voluntarily choose to attend has a right to adhere to its religious views on its property.

            You have every right to complain if they tried to impose these kinds of rules in a PUBLIC institution, or if they try to impose their views on people who DON'T choose to come there and who DON'T agree to abide by the rules of the institution when they choose to come there.  

            •  Politically extreme... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              a2nite, nanorich, schnecke21

              ...is a college thinking it has a right to put itself in its students' pants.

              •  how is it doing that? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                coffeetalk

                how is it putting itself in its students pants?

              •  BC clearly isn't doing that (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Bailey2001, VClib, Wisper

                nobody is monitoring whether its students choose to have sex, or whether they use contraception.

                A Catholic institution learned that students, who chose to become part of that Catholic institution and agreed to abide by the rules of that Catholic institution, were publicly and openly distributing something that clearly violated their religion on campus from dorms owned by that Catholic institution.  They asked the students to stop, and the students refused to stop.

                I presume that any BC student who wants to have sex is intelligent enough to go to a drugstore off campus to get condoms, like most of the country does.  

                •  I guess you haven't ever heard of dorm searches (0+ / 0-)

                  and drug tests which can detect birth control pills then?

                  You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                  by Throw The Bums Out on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 08:39:44 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  no (0+ / 0-)

                    i have never heard of boston college scouring dormitories and then illegally forcing students to take drug tests in order to detect completely legal medications. also i have never heard of any university in the united states doing this.

                    •  Do you have any idea how easy and cheap it (0+ / 0-)

                      is to add birth control pills to the standard random drug screenings?  And just what makes it any more illegal than any other drug testing?

                      You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                      by Throw The Bums Out on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:04:18 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  you're getting carried away (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Wisper

                        is there any school in the united states that requires students to take random drug tests for legal medications?  if i'm not mistaken, there's only one or two college's that have tried for force all students to take random tests for illegal drugs -- and im pretty sure those cases are all being litigated vociferously. you're positing a scenario that is exotic, dystopian, and completely beyond the scope of the situation being discussed here. it's a non-issue. we're not talking about swat teams kicking down people's front doors and dragging them away for possessing birth control. we're talking about the administration of a catholic university insisting that students in campus housing respect certain tenets of catholic church doctrine with respect to their behavior, and that they not use their dwellings on school property to distribute condoms.

            •  Their students get federal student aid; they ain't (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nanorich

              Private.

              •  huh? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                coffeetalk, VClib, Wisper

                the government lending students money to pay for tuition at a private university doesnt somehow transform that university into a public institution.

              •  They are a private university and can have any (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                coffeetalk, VClib

                rules they want.  If they say you must wear uniform, you have to wear them.  If they say you have to attend religious classes to graduate, you have to do it.  If they say curfew is 8 pm...it is 8pm.  if they say no boys in the dorm rooms, no boys are allowed. If they say no tv, computers or internet in dorms...that's the rule.  

                A student signed up for it, pays to attend and can leave at any time that they don't like the rules.

              •  a2nite - this issue has been litigated (0+ / 0-)

                accepting federal student aid and research grants do subject any university to federal rules regarding those programs. However, it doesn't change the university's primary property rights to enforce rules on it's campus and to have rules for students who live on campus. In the eyes of the law BC is clearly a private college and not subject to the same rules as a state funded public university.

                "let's talk about that"

                by VClib on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:26:35 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Again, why does it make any difference whether (0+ / 0-)

              or not it is on their fucking property or not?  Give me one good reason why it wouldn't be the same if they were handing out condoms in front of the local mall (with the mall's permission).

              You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

              by Throw The Bums Out on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 08:39:21 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  valid point (0+ / 0-)

                A private college or university can probably legally set any code of conduct it wants for behavior on or off its campus. I agree.

                •  We've been in agreement thru this thread (0+ / 0-)

                  but a private university dictating action that can or can't be done off-campus with no formal tie to the school?  I think thats some shaky ground.

                  I agree that the students couldn't bill themselves as an official group using BC's name, colors, mascot or logo.  

                  What if a student wanted to volunteer in a Boston planned parenthood clinic?  Outside of studies, nothing on campus and with no affiliation with the school.... if the School found out and took action against a person for this I think they could be at some litigious risk.

                  Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

                  by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 12:01:29 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Caring... (0+ / 0-)

            If they recommend abstinence when it comes dealing with sexual behavior then they are more caring than the people handing out the condoms.

            Condoms are not foolproof.  They can break, come off, etc. At which point STDs ... oh wait... gotta check my pc card at the door.. STI's I mean, and pregnancy become a factor.

            With abstinence there is no possibility of pregnancy and therefore no possibility of needing an abortifacient / abortion.  And I'd venture to say that STI's are a non-factor in this scenario as well.

            So which is more caring for the individual?  Promoting something that keeps them safe or something that has only the "potential" to keep them safe?

          •  At this point (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            coffeetalk, VClib, Wisper

            it's fairly obvious the problem is people just don't like the Catholic Church and this is just a way to slam it.  

            However,   This isn't new doctrine, the student group had been warned and it's sort of non news.  

            Like, by the way, the Pope is Catholic.  That kind of non news.

            I'm a Kennedy Catholic.

            by EquiStar on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 07:20:25 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Very true (0+ / 0-)
              it's fairly obvious the problem is people just don't like the Catholic Church and this is just a way to slam it.  
              Truthfully, Im more interested in the 1st Amendment issue here (and people's clear distorted fantasy about it) and am just skimming the comments, but I've no doubt somewhere is a comment about the people enforcing this policy are all child-molesters or knowingly helped cover up child molesting.

              I am a pretty hardcore atheist but this blind Catholic bashing shit is getting old.  Its just now openly accepted on Daily Kos like gay bashing is on Red State.

              Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

              by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:57:48 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Ive been out of college for some time (0+ / 0-)

          but I still do not want my penis or anyone else's penis enslaved to the Pope.

          This thread is going in a lot of different directions, most of them involving fictitious interpretations of years of legal opinion, but I just want it ON RECORD that I am 100% opposed to Penis Enslavement.

          That is all.

          (Fair warning to anyone reading this at work:  DO NOT Google the term "Penis Enslavement")

          Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

          by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 12:05:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  When your institution accepts Federal $$$ (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, nanorich

      If they want to force students to follow the Catholic faith, then they should not accept Federal money. They certainly should not have an ROTC detachment. A church owned program offering non-religious academic programs to people outside their faith merits no special privileges.

      Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your shackles. It is by the picket line and direct action that true freedom will be won, not by electing people who promise to screw us less than the other guy.

      by rhonan on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 04:20:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  huh? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coffeetalk, johnny wurster, VClib

        so the distribution of federal monies is now contingent on all recipients of federal dollars adhering to some sort of non-official stance of the united states government regarding giving away free condoms? and how exactly is this catholic school forcing students who willfully applied to and decided to attend a catholic college to follow the catholic faith? are they forcing them to go to mass? are they not allowing them to use condoms? are freshman required to wear rosary beads? are they somehow not allowing students to transfer away from bc if they dont like the school? oh yeah, no. theyre not doing any of those things. they are asking students who live in university dormitories to stop operating a quasi-formal, unsanctioned condom distribution system that violates the core values of the school.

        also, is boston college someone exempt from taxation? if so, that would be a surprise to me.

        •  The distribution of federal monies (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a2nite, nanorich, schnecke21, Wisper

          has ALWAYS been contingent on all recipients recognizing fully the rights of all people to be free from discrimination, including the practice of their religion (or lack thereof) and the expression of their beliefs regarding said practices. So if you accept federal monies you can't just create a Catholic reality with said federal monies, since our federal government and can't be taken to be an arm of anything promoting pro-Catholicism over any other choices.  

          Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

          by a gilas girl on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 04:44:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  thats well and good (0+ / 0-)

            but how is bc abridging anyones religious rights? and how does any of this relate to the biology department at bc getting hhs grants to conduct research?

          •  So, where is this law? So you mean if I attend (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            coffeetalk

            any number of Baptist universities and I want to bring in a keg or hold a late night poker game....that is allowed?  

            Or if I attend a Muslim school...Friday night pork chops to anyone in the halls is ok?  

            What about BYU?  Can I bring my boyfriend to spend the night in my dorm because I don't care about the Mormon views on that?

          •  a gilas girl - you are wrong (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Wisper

            This issue has been well litigated and there is no legal basis for your position.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:34:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  You could not be more wrong (0+ / 0-)

            Not even if you tried.

            This is not opinion (aside from your inaccurate one).  There are CENTURIES of jurisprudence on this and ALL OF IT disagrees with what you just typed.  Without exception.  And with good reason.

            Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

            by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:55:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Is Boston College (0+ / 0-)

          exempt from taxation? Um, yeah.

          Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

          by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:02:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  haha (0+ / 0-)

            I got a little too wound up in the zealousness of my argument, and momentarily forgot that whole tax-exempt, non-profit educational institution thing. Valid point!

            •  And nothing (0+ / 0-)

              The commenter made this statement:

              also, is boston college someone exempt from taxation? if so, that would be a surprise to me.
              Boston College is, in fact, exempt from taxation.

              Amazing how, almost every thread I go on lately, most of the people who are defending this particular conservative policy or the great legacy of Margaret Thatcher happen to be RKBA people.

              Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

              by fenway49 on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 07:35:22 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Who's 'defending" it? It's a simple matter of (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                VClib, Wisper

                private property issues.  It doesn't matter if I like it or not...I personally would never attend a Catholic university because my core beliefs and theirs don't work well together.  So guess what?  I went to a university that held my same beliefs and had rules I could successfully live by. I didn't go to a school that had rules and views that went against my core values, however the students in this case did just that.  They chose a school that had certain rules and certain core beliefs and wonder why they can't break those rules without getting in trouble.  Well, the answer is that the student made the mistake by choosing that school. The school has every legal right to impose rules, whatever they may be, because it is a private school.  It is as simple as that.  

                Whatever the hell you mean by this, I have no clue:

                Amazing how, almost every thread I go on lately, most of the people who are defending this particular conservative policy or the great legacy of Margaret Thatcher happen to be RKBA people.
                I have never typed a word about Margaret Thatcher, she is no hero of mine, and my views on gun rights have zero to do with this conversation.
        •  Makes me wonder what people on this site are (0+ / 0-)

          about. I agree with you 100%. Everyone attending the school knows what's up. It's a frikken Catholic school after all! This is what freaks people out about "liberals, (illiberals)" they see them as Bolsheviks trying to take away their basic right to choose the life and religion they want.

          "You can die for Freedom, you just can't exercise it"

          by shmuelman on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:14:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Wrong (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dhshoops, nanorich, a2nite, schnecke21

            Everyone I've ever known who went to BC went there specifically because there was a decades-old understanding that they'd more or less keep this kind of dogma out of your face. That is the lived experience of my friends and family who attended the school. In my youth I spent many a night at MaryAnn's in Cleveland Circle with hundreds of BC students who didn't have abstinence on the mind.

            Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

            by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:31:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  rhonan - why? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ahianne, Bailey2001, Wisper

        Why would it be in the public interest to follow your suggestion? ROTC programs at Catholic universities have provided tens of thousands of officers to our armed services for the past 70 years.

        Accepting federal research grants or student aid does not change the character of a private college into a public university. It's a legal issue that has been well litigated.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:33:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My religious freedom. (0+ / 0-)

          I object to my Federal tax dollars benefiting institutions that support primitive superstition. No Federal dollars should be allowed to go to any institution that claims a religious purpose in any of their activities. I most especially object to my tax dollars education future military officers at institutions that expect students to conform to the school's religious views.

          Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your shackles. It is by the picket line and direct action that true freedom will be won, not by electing people who promise to screw us less than the other guy.

          by rhonan on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 06:49:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Religion doesn't mean you don't have rights (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, schnecke21

      Being in a religious institution doesn't mean you have to give away your right to free speech. The college has to walk a fine line there. If they attempt to squelch someone's free speech simply because it isn't in line with their doctrine they might find themselves in a world of hurt.

      Now if the student's were doing this in the middle of the college square threatening everything the religion espouses then they might call this act an attack on their religion. But if two people are involved in a contract of a personal nature then it doesn't involve the college no matter the place. Religion doesn't mean you lose your other rights as a citizen.

      Now the student's might be expelled or censured in some way. But the college need's to be mindful of how this occurs. It would likely end up in court leaving them with a lot of bad press no matter the verdict.

      In my view, it's a whole lot of hot air on the part of the college. They only stand to lose if they continue to fight these students. And I hope that the understand that Catholics in the US do not share the views of the Catholic Church in Rome when it comes to sex and abortion. Over here we accept reality of the world around us and don't try to sugar coat it with bible passages to make it sound right.

      "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

      by Wynter on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:03:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Conversly... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib

      No one has the "right" to go to a religious institution and say, "I don't believe in your religion, so your religious institution has to accommodate my beliefs that conflict with your religion."  

      No one has the "right" to go into a secular situation and say, "I don't agree with your beliefs, so you have to accommodate my beliefs that conflict with yours."

      But those who believe like you seem to think that's the way it works!

    •  That would be fine... (0+ / 0-)

      if Boston College didn't take funding from the federal government, didn't accept students who have federally insured student loans, and didn't accept grants from various bodies like the CDC...'

      so if this is a totally Catholic institution...then maybe they should just forego funding from US taxpayers.

      But, your arguments tend to ignore the reality of " private institutions " engaging in discriminatory practices, when none of these socalled private colleges could exists without subsidies from US tax payers, as wells as billions in dollars in grants paid for the federal and state government.

      •  accepting (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VClib

        federal grants doesn't transform an institution into an arm of the government, nor does doing so somehow cede control of that institution to the whims of tax payers.

        also, where is boston college engaging in discriminatory practices? i haven't heard about this.

      •  nanorich - this issue has been well litigated (0+ / 0-)

        Accepting federal student aid, as well as research grants, do not turn private universities into public colleges. There is no legal basis for that view.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 09:52:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  That is a horrific idea (0+ / 0-)

        As an ardent supporter of the crystal clear inviolate separation of Church and State, what you are proposing is a very very bad idea.

        Religious institutions should, and do, have a right to be treated equally with secular institutions offering similar services (ie, post-secondary education).  The religious institution does not forfeit its religious rights by accepting funds or cooperating with the State; just as the State does not endorse or become obligated to religious principles for providing funds or cooperating with an institution.

        This has been litigated many many many times and needs to stay the way it is.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:52:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The churches "rights" (0+ / 0-)

      The churches "rights" do not supersede or nullify your own rights.

      The church is going to lose. Again.

      •  roninkai - BC may lose the public opinion (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bailey2001, Wisper

        fight, but they are on very solid legal ground. They won't lose in court.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:37:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  They will not lose in a lawsuit and most likely (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VClib, Wisper

        it will never come to that. Most any lawyer would take their initial and dutifully explain the 1A and private property rights to them in detain. Even if they found counsel that was willing...and a court that would actually hear it....that's where it would end.

        This is a private Catholic university, they can have any rules they wish.

  •  You made me LOL: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tonedevil, doraphasia, a2nite
    "Oh, that's a Catholic college," she said. "You're better than that."

    Irony takes a worse beating from Republicans than Wile E. Coyote does from Acme. --Tara the Antisocial Social Worker

    by Youffraita on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 03:10:19 PM PDT

  •  Let me tell you, I would much rather (5+ / 0-)

    face discipline than consequences when it comes to condoms and to what condoms prevent.

    What is truth? -- Pontius Pilate

    by commonmass on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 03:37:33 PM PDT

  •  The archbishop of other people's bedrooms... (5+ / 0-)

    there's yet another Hunterism.

    There's got to be a book.

    priceless.

    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

    by a gilas girl on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 04:38:27 PM PDT

  •  I CAN'T BELIEVE THERE'S NO BACON (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coffeetalk, Whatithink, Wisper

    AT THIS KOSHER DELI!!! KEEP YOUR VALUES OFF OF MY PALETTE!!!

    same situation? i honestly think so.

  •  Not buying all this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, cocinero, wintergreen8694

    "Catholic values" stuff. I was raised Catholic and my relatives have attended BC for generations. My cousin and my other cousin's girlfriend go there now. I live 5 minutes from the place.

    And I can tell you that I know NOBODY raised Catholic in my generation (I'm 37) or younger who actually believes sex outside marriage or condoms are wrong, or who refrained from either. So whatever the official dogma, they're promoting nothing except making people go somewhere else for their condoms. The idea that it's just "anti-Catholic" liberals who think this policy is stupid is not accurate.

    Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

    by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:34:39 PM PDT

    •  Come to think of it (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cocinero

      My dad, who's almost 70, thinks BC is being ridiculous and stupid. And he was raised Catholic pre-Vatican 2.

      Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

      by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:38:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The school, no doubt, has the right to forbid (0+ / 0-)

      distribution of condoms on campus. I would be shocked if 20% of the students,  parents or Catholics in the US support this reactionary dogma on the part of the school. The trend we are seeing is that eventually, that 20% of Catholics will become 100%, meaning no one else will be left. We are seeing this quandary in Judaism, as the percentage of "Orthodox" (this is a meaningless, recently made up term but beyond the scope of this discussion) Jews grows v. the Jewish population which is sinking into assimilation. The Church needs to decide if that's what they want. Otherwise, the decision will be tacitly made for the Church by the congregants.

      "You can die for Freedom, you just can't exercise it"

      by shmuelman on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:00:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  who said it was only anti-catholic liberals? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coffeetalk, VClib, Wisper

      the people yelling in this thread are basically arguing about everything except this situation: bc is not preventing anyone from having sex. theyre not preventing anyone from using condoms. theyre not abridging the first amendment. theyre not blocking the use of birth control pills. theyre not telling people what to do in their own bedrooms. they are attempting to enforce a code of conduct based on the values that they espouse. and about those values: because you're catholic and think the rule is dumb doesnt mean two thousand years of doctrinal theology is suddenly erased. how many catholics are ok with abortion? isnt it, like, 70%? regardless, it doesnt matter: the body of the catholic laity doesnt dictate church doctrine. the catholic church is a monarchy, not a democracy.

      i grew up in newton. im a far left wing atheist-leaning agnostic raised in a jewish household. i also went to bc as a student, and didnt like it at all because. . . its a conservative catholic school, which is basically the polar opposite of everything i believe in. but i was also keenly aware of the fact that i was on the campus of a catholic school. the president of the university is a jesuit priest. there are crucifixes in the classrooms. there are chapels on campus and housing for other jesuits. theology is part of the core curriculum, and all of this is their right.

      •  Well, that's why (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ahianne

        I didn't go to BC. After 13 years of Catholic schools, I wasn't having it, even though everyone I knew at BC stressed how it wasn't overbearingly Catholic. Most people I've known who've gone to BC did so despite its Catholic affiliation, not because of it. They went because they had a family tradition, etc.

        A lot of the defense of BC has been about their right to enforce "Catholic values." So we should be clear about whose "values" we're talking. Those are not the values of the overwhelming majority of Catholic people I've known, just the little cabal in Rome and down on Washington Street. You can say the Catholic Church is a monarchy, not a democracy, but after growing up in that church I feel personally entitled to some ownership.

        Can BC have this policy? Sure. Are they exempt from me, born and raised Catholic and ten years an altar boy, from saying it's stupid and only going to alienate people? Not a chance.

        Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

        by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:18:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no ones arguing (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib, Wisper

          that you cant say their stance is stupid. heck, i coudlnt disagree with the stance of the university any more vehemently. what i am saying, however, is that you cant really, legitimately go to a conservative catholic school and then be shocked when you realize . . . youre a student at a conservative catholic school.

          •  What I'm saying (0+ / 0-)

            is that it's NOT such a conservative Catholic school. My cousin, who's a freshman at another school, spends about half his nights in his girlfriend's bed in her BC dorm. Nobody blinks. It's a beer-lover's party school. People at BC have been having sex, using condoms, hooking up, etc. for decades. The administration has for decades looked the other way.

            I think most people who grew up Catholic in this area are all more likely to think this is ridiculous. You might think Catholic = sexually conservative, well duh. I, from the inside, think of the complete lack of overlap between the hierarchy's positions and the positions -- and actions -- of Catholic college students, and the BC I've always known had some awareness of that and tread cautiously.

            Sure, if they keep pushing things this way, people will begin to vote with their feet. But I still think it's stupid in the here and now.

            Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

            by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:38:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  leave the Church you idiots. The Pope is a fraud. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    Jesus actually sank; it was just the cartoon effect of the New Testament. As soon as He (Jesus) looked down, kerplunk.

    Those who quote Santayana are condemned to repeat him. Me

    by Mark B on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:49:57 PM PDT

  •  College may find themselves in a lawsuit (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, schnecke21

    Seeing that it's not paid for or giving them out stamped with the college's logo on them does not give them the right to prohibit the passing out of anything.

    If they were doing this as part of something affiliated with the college then I could see the administration sticking it's nose into the matter. But it's only a bunch of students helping other students by giving out something that isn't illegal or dangerous.

    So in essence the college doesn't have much say in the matter I would say. They can stomp their feet and threaten but I don't think they can legally take any other action without being at the other end of a lawsuit. This is all about an individual's right to "freedom of speech". The speech part is an act of giving out a condom. Taking away a person's right simply because they are enrolled as a student is illegal.

    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

    by Wynter on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:55:28 PM PDT

    •  Word is (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wynter, wintergreen8694

      this senior who's feeling degraded runs a super-conservative Catholic organization that requires attending mass twice a day and wants to return to Latin. So yeah...

      Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

      by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 05:57:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  this isnt a first amendment issue (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      athanasius, VClib, Wisper

      this is private property. this is a school enforcing its own code of conduct over students residing in dorms, on campus.

      •  Doesn't matter... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite

        You can complain and toss the student out if you want the bad press. But someone passing their friend a condom is simply a matter of free speech. Private property doesn't mean that you lose your rights as a citizen.

        Yes, the church run college can throw a tantrum if it wants the bad press. But Catholics in the US don't share the strict views on this like those back in Rome. They accept the real world around them and deal with it as human beings while trying to remain practicing Catholics.

        A condom isn't an illegal item, nor is it restricted in it's access to those under the age of 18. You might as well start protesting every drug store around the campus to prohibit their sale to any student. It won't work. The school needs to realize the futility of their stand.

        "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

        by Wynter on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:09:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You really don't understand the First Amendment (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib, Wisper

          You should start by reading it.  It begins, "Congress shall make no law . . . "  That means the GOVERNMENT can't abridge your right to speech.  Private institutions and private people absolutely CAN abridge your right to free speech on their property.

          Private property doesn't mean that you lose your rights as a citizen.
          If you mean you think people have "First Amendment" rights on private property -- that's so, so, so very wrong.  You don't have a "First Amendment right" to come on my property and say whatever you want.  If I invite you to something, say a party, on my property,  and you say something I don't like -- even if it's perfectly reasonable and legal -- I can tell you to leave, and if you refuse you are trespassing and I can have you arrested.

          You have a First Amendment right to go into a public park -- government owned property -- and say to people that you do not believe in God.  You DO NOT have a First Amendment right to go into a church -- which is NOT government owned property -- and say to people that you don't believe in God.  If you try, they can have you removed from their property for that.  

          •  You and I are agreeing... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tonedevil, a2nite

            They can ask you to leave. But they can't tell you what you can say. If you speak up then they can go the route of pushing you out the door. But they can't truly ban what you say. We are in agreement, but I think you missed how we got there.. lol.

            The students can give out condoms. And if the school wants to fight them then it's up to them, but it would bring a lot of bad press is what I am saying.

            The college needs to be very mindful of how it looks. Catholics are not all hardline follow the church in Rome of else. Attitudes inside the US have created a chasm between the two sides. Trying to be more strict could backfire on admissions.

            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

            by Wynter on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:30:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Here's where we disagree (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Whatithink, Bailey2001, VClib

              You are saying that it's "actionable" or that there can be a "lawsuit" over a private school telling students what they can or cannot say on school grounds.

              That is just flat out wrong.  (I'm a lawyer, by the way.)

              •  And as a lawyer... (0+ / 0-)

                what action can the school take? Only one thing... break the contract.

                The fact remains that you cannot "make" anyone say or not say what you what. Isn't that true? Individuals are not automatons. You cannot force someone to act a specific way unless they agree to do so. The college can insist they abide by the agreed upon contract, but that's all they can do. They cannot force a student to do something they are unwilling to do or say.

                We are saying the same things, but you are simply stating it from a different point of view. The "actionable" term was a bit overstated, my apologies. I backed away from that point a few comments back if you recall. The end result is "yes" the school can go hardline on their students, but at a cost to their reputation in the eyes of the public. The issue doesn't reflect the views of the majority of Catholics in the US. That was the point I ended with.

                "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

                by Wynter on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 12:16:16 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Wynter - you have an incorrect view of the (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Wisper

              First Amendment. It isn't an issue here.

              "let's talk about that"

              by VClib on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:44:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  The First Amendment doesn't work that way (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib, Wisper
    •  You do not enjoy freedom of speech... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coffeetalk, Bailey2001, VClib, Wisper

      ... on private property. Period. You are on private property only by permission of the owner, and the owner is absolutely free to condition said permission on a code of conduct dictating, frankly, whatever they like, as long as the actions in question are themselves not illegal.

      A lawsuit would fall flat on its face at the first hearing.

      •  You really interpret things oddly... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, Wisper

        Private property doesn't have the kind of power you think it does.

        Yes, the owner of the property can insist on certain actions that cannot take place with the result only being that you have to leave. That's it...

        They cannot tell you that you can't speak if that speech is not illegal in any way. Attempting to squelch someone's other rights while on someone's private property can be actionable if it is done wrong. You can prohibit firearms from being brought onto your property. But allowing someone to use a firearm in a manner that breaks the law is illegal. This is a rough example I know. But in essence the law still stands even on private property. Denying someone their rights even on private property is actionable. The owner of the property can only do one thing.. ask them to leave.

        "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

        by Wynter on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:18:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then you agree. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib, Bailey2001

          If you go back and read my original comment, you'll see that I did not suggest any mechanism by which the owner might prevent the exercise of rights other than the denial of continued permission to be on the property.

          For example, if the university were threatening to tie the students up and cover their mouths with duct tape, then yes, that would obviously be illegal.

          But employing disciplinary measures to prevent them from distributing condoms on campus, which is their property? Completely legit, just as it would be were a guest at my house to start distributing condoms and I asked them to apologise or what-have-you.

        •  Try screaming your head off in Macy's and see (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coffeetalk, Wisper

          if they don't arrest you for screaming your head off.  That's all you have to do is stand perfectly still and start screaming.  You can even just try a good curse word and repeat it over and over again in a normal tone of voice...see how that would work.  I guarantee the guys in blue will be there shortly to tell you all about the first amendment and how it doesn't apply.

          They will ask you once (maybe) to stop and then off to jail you go or if you are lucky they will just write you a disturbing the peace citation and make you pay a fine.

        •  LOL (0+ / 0-)

          You should fund their legal case then.  You will need to schedule a lot of meetings with the attorney though because your interpretation of "rights" and what is "actionable" has absolutely no resemblance to what they teach in law school.

          You're going to need to teach the lawyer how your laws work because they don't work like ours.

          Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

          by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:45:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Sigh. One more time. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib, Wisper, Bailey2001

      You have no "freedom of speech" on someone else's property when you are there with their permission.  

      "Freedom of speech" only applies to the government.  "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech."  Students have First Amendment rights at a PUBLIC institution, because a public institution is run by the government.  At a private institution, religious or not, students have no "First Amendment" rights.  At a private institution, the school can prevent students from speech that the government clearly could not prevent.  If Harvard, or Stanford, or USC, or BC wants to say, "You can't pass out pamphlets promoting religion, or atheism, or socialism, or whatever," they can do that.  Because it's their privately owned institution.  They have a contract with the student, where the student pays money in exchange for certain things.  But part of that contract is that the student has to obey the institution's rules, or the institution can discipline the student.  The student has no "First Amendment right" to violate the rules of a privately owned institution.  

      •  You are citing efforts that contradict the school (0+ / 0-)

        ..in an open manner. We are not talking about "fighting" what the school teaches. These students aren't in the main square of the college contradicting the tenets of the schools teachings.

        And in the end, the only thing the school can do is expel the students thus breaking the contract. We do not lose our rights as citizens. We do have to abide by our contracts we make. But if those contracts go beyond the bounds of religion and try to infringe on our rights in other areas they might be opening up a hornet's nest if they fight it in court.

        "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

        by Wynter on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:23:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You don't understand the First Amendment (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jaym, VClib, Wisper

          at all.

          Here's an example.  I'm in New Orleans.  We generally hate the Atlanta Falcons.  I can make a rule in my house that anybody who says the word "falcon" cannot come in my home.  That's my complete right.  If I invite you to a party for the whole neighborhood in my house and you say "falcon," i can tell you to leave, and if you don't, I can have you arrested for trespassing.

          And you know what?  Loyola University here in New Orleans can do the exact same thing if they want.  They can say, if you display Atlanta Falcons stuff in your dorm room, you will be kicked out of the dorm.  It may be really stupid, it may lose them some students, but they have every right to do that.  The students don't have some "First Amendment" right to display Atlanta Falcons stuff on someone else's private property.  

          The school told the students that openly distributing condoms out of the school's dorm room violated the school's policy and they should stop.  The students refused to stop.  There is no "right" of students to keep violating the school's policy.  

          •  I don't understand (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            a2nite, coffeetalk, Wisper

            Why this isn't self-evident. You can completely disagree with the stance of the school's administration, while at the same time recognizing that it is their right to take this stance.

            Despite being conservative Catholic university, the student body, as well as the faculty and staff, are an extremely diverse group where politics and religion is concerned, and wide swaths of the BC community disagree with the administration's policies in this matter. And I think it's healthy for them to debate it, and healthy for them to oppose it, and even to protest it. But at the end of the day there is simply no way around the fact that it's BC's house, and BC's rules.

        •  That makes ZERO sense (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Bailey2001

          as in NONE.  At all.

          These students have no case.  At all.  The school would win on the first motion to dismiss.  All a lawsuit is going to do is waste more money and officially recognize the school as being in the right.

          Because they are.

          You have this weird interpretation of the 1st Amendment that equates to no one is ever allowed to tell anyone they can't do something.  This is nowhere close to accurate... nor has it ever been in US history.  Nor should it.

          Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

          by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:42:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I like "Sigh. One More Time." I feel this way (0+ / 0-)

        often....in my classroom and out.  :)

    •  This is private property and there will be no (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib, Wisper

      lawsuit that would end up in a win for the students.  They do not have to have a reason, they can simply say "no, not here on this property....if you do not like it, pack your bags and leave."

      Freedom of speech is only protected from interference of the government.  There is no freedom of speech in a private residence, business or school....unless said owner grants them.   You can only claim your rights if they are infringed by the government.

       If you come to my home and I forbid you to speak...you can do as I ask or leave at anytime you wish or leave when I direct you to do so, but you can not sue me because I refused to allow you to speak in my home.

      Again, this school is a private Catholic university.

    •  Wynter - BC is on solid legal ground (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wisper

      If there is a lawsuit the College will win. There are no First Amendment issues here. The First Amendment is a restriction on government and has nothing to do with private universities.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 09:42:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wynter - if there is a lawsuit (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wisper, Bailey2001

      BC will win at summary judgement. The college is on very solid legal ground.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 09:55:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Talk about freedom of speech being denied... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero
  •  this has been a big local story (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nblalonde, fenway49, a2nite, schnecke21

    it broke a few days ago and it is not going away quietly.

    people are taking sides feeling really strongly one way or the other.

    about one third of the kids at BC are Protestant.  Does going to a Roman Catholic college automatically mean that they have to abide by RC dogma?

    Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
    Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights for support in dealing with grief.

    by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:02:29 PM PDT

    •  Yes, it does. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib

      At least, whatever elements of RC dogma that BC sees fit to incorporate into their code of student conduct.

    •  no (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coffeetalk, VClib, Wisper

      again, no one is impinging on their religious freedom. they're in a catholic school that is asking its students to comply with the values they are espousing. they're not forcing protestants to go to mass. theyre not forcing anyone to be baptized. they're not forcing jews to take off yarmulkes. theyre not forcing muslim women to go without their hijabs. they're not even telling anyone theyre not allowed to use birth control on campus. they are simply telling their students that they do not want an apparently large, unofficial free condom distribution network operating in bc campus housing.

    •  Its not dogma (0+ / 0-)

      Its a student code of conduct.  And yes, by attending you are agreeing to adhere.  Its a private institution with private rules.  Its not like the kids are facing criminal penalties over this...that would be unconstitutional, but they sure as shit are going to face institutional discipline for breaking the rules.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:39:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Meanwhile, Vatican is Streaming Porn (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    If you visit this story and go to the end, you'll see that computers at the vatican are serving up some porn for the pious little hippocritters who reside there.  

  •  Is it really 2013? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fenway49, Remediator

    Or am I just in 1958 and don't know it?

  •  Unwanted children are God's plan (0+ / 0-)

    Or by the laws of commutivity in the English language (which, btw, was good enough for Jesus), God plans unwanted children.

    So take that, you selfish immature parents who try to thwart God's plan!

    No, I mean join the club, man. We meet every Thursday. We're trying to raise money for a field trip to Amsterdam. -- Leo (Tommy Chong) on That 70's Show.

    by lotac on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:07:25 PM PDT

  •  Not approved at BC (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Remediator, a2nite

  •  The administration has their view (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero, a2nite

    The student body theirs. From the Boston Globe:

    As activist groups go, Boston College Students for Sexual Health is relatively new: formed in 2009, after a campus referendum in which students asked for more access to birth control and more information about sex.

    Republicans...think the American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it. Harry S. Truman

    by fenway49 on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:23:24 PM PDT

  •  Non-Catholics go to this University (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, schnecke21

    I am very sure that BC does not require all of it students to adhere to Catholic doctrine in all matters - not only would it be impossible, it would dry up the pool of potential students to the point the institution would close. BC does not require its students - even Catholic ones - to go to Mass, to fight the death penalty, to work for social and economic justice, etc. So what the real problem here is selective enforcement of Catholic doctrine.

    There is another huge issue with the actions of BC - they are against the policies of the Catholic Church, at least the pre-Karol Wotjyla Catholic Church. In the reorganization of the Catholic Church in the 60s under the Second Vatican Council, the Church issued a Declaration on religious Freedom. It says, in part:

    ...Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ...

    2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits...

    It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth. However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom.

    The whole declaration is here:

    Declaration on religious freedome

    That being said, I really don't get the straight world in its reaction to safer sex. Every gay bar I've ever been in has free condoms on the bar or in a bowl near the door. One of the great untold health policy stories is how the gay community fought against HIV, in part, by providing free condoms. All straight spaces where people are likely to hook up should follow their lead.

    A government that denies gay men the right to bridal registry is a facist state - Margaret Cho

    by CPT Doom on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:26:55 PM PDT

    •  they're not asking them (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coffeetalk, VClib

      to adhere to Catholic doctrine in all matters. In fact, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't even want that. What they are asking, in a certain small set of situations, is for students not to use school property to actively undermine a core aspect of catholic teaching.

    •  It is a certain segment of of the straight world. (0+ / 0-)

      Safe sex is a very good idea. We would have lots less problems if people learned more about it.  

      People who have problems with their own sexuality are making it more difficult for the rest of us. People who have hang ups should not be elected. Some people call them the American Taliban. Looks like a good name for them.

      I just think they are evil & stupid.

    •  Doesnt matter (0+ / 0-)

      Its a private school... they can set any conduct and policy rules they want.  You are accepting them by attending.

      if you think the rules are too strict or conflict with your non-Catholic beliefs there are over 1,000 other colleges in this country you can attend.  If you qualified for BC, there is no doubt you can qualify for others.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:36:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I guess that brings new meaning to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero

    "Where the rubbers hit the road"

    By the authority vested in me by Kaiser Wilhelm II, I pronounce you man and wife. Proceed with the execution.

    by HarryParatestis on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:28:38 PM PDT

  •  The Catholic Church is an anachronism. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    It needs to go away now.

    The GOP can't win on ideas. They can only win by lying, cheating, and stealing. So they do.

    by psnyder on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:34:47 PM PDT

  •  What is the problem? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coffeetalk

    A religious institution wants to to adhere to its religious doctrine? This is news?

  •  Dental floss? (0+ / 0-)

    Is that for getting pubes out of your teeth or something?  If so, does that mean that conservative Catholic kids think oral sex is okay, at least as long as you don't use a condom?  Am I just missing something because I'm, like, a million years old?  Or because I'm not a conservative Catholic kid?  Please 'splain.

  •  It's a private organization (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bailey2001

    no student has to go to Boston College.  If they flaunt their violations of school policy, I can't blame the school for punishing them.  There's a simple solution: stop giving your tuition dollars to an institution that espouses these utterly crazy ideas.

    "Unrestricted immigration is a dangerous thing -- look at what happened to the Iroquois." Garrison Keillor

    by Spider Stumbled on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 06:47:11 PM PDT

  •  Seems like condoms are a (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero, a2nite

    good idea.

    'Specially on a college campus.

    Seems like Catholic teaching is flat-out clueless.  

  •  Candiru , you can't be to careful . (0+ / 0-)

    I suggest every male have a condom in his wallet just in case they feel the need to go for a swim . You just can't be to careful .

    Drop the name-calling MB 2/4/11 + Please try to use ratings properly! Kos 9/9/11

    by indycam on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 07:06:26 PM PDT

  •  Is a dollar to get laid really too much to pay? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VClib

    Here's what I don't understand. Is someone really going to have unprotected sex because they have to pay $1 for a condom?  And who are the women giving it up to these losers?  Don't they have standards?

    College kids (including us back in the day) spend so much drinking and partying that I have no sympathy for a guy having to buy condoms. Stop whining that sex is too expensive. Try getting married and having a baby. That doesn't cost a dollar.

    If you are dating someone who won't buy their own condoms, you're dating a bum. Get out.

  •  An air drop, funded by progressives (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, schnecke21

    from coast to coast, over the campus on a given Friday afternoon.

    I think condoms in a wide variety of colors would be good.

    The pilot can drop the condoms by the hundreds of thousands and be gone in the clouds before the administration can even react.  

    Meanwhile, Trojan should offer a 10 percent Catholic discount on all their products.  

  •  one assumes that they will be upgrading their (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    foundling wheels in concert with such actions

    http://www.wired.com/...

    A baby hatch is a place where mothers can bring their babies, usually newborn, and leave them anonymously in a safe place to be found and cared for. This kind of arrangement was common in mediaeval times and in the 18th and 19th centuries, when the device was known as a foundling wheel. Foundling wheels were taken out of use in the late 19th century but a modern form, the baby hatch, began to be introduced again from 1952

    Warning - some snark above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 Acedia is essentially a flight from the world that leads to not caring even that one does not care

    by annieli on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 07:14:06 PM PDT

  •  This, just after (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Remediator

    the Catholic Church just selected its first pope who has not been categorically against condoms. There's something seriously wrong with anyone who's lagging behind even the Vatican.

  •  Your Tradition (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Remediator
    "A student group at Boston College has, for years, distributed free condoms to students."
    “The distribution of condoms is not congruent with our values and traditions,” read the letter, which was signed by Paul J. Chebator
    If this has been going on for years it is "your tradition".
    You would think a guy running a college would know that.
    Look for lawsuits to follow.
  •  Is it bad that I'd take both? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    Because if I was at this campus, I'd collect both dental floss and condoms.  There's a use for both in a survival situation, after all.  =D

    I'm likely making this up as I go along.

    by Anjana on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 08:30:55 PM PDT

  •  but ... but ... New Pope! (0+ / 0-)

    New Pope, New Pope, wherever you are!

    Bring your popely powers to bear!

  •  This is all about the cardinal (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ahianne, a2nite

    in his role as the diocesan bishop, cracking down on a Catholic university in his diocese and ordering it to put a stop to practices about which it had previously chosen to look the other way.

    The sad thing is, until it became a big issue in last year's election campaign, BC (where I went to grad school in the late 1980s and early 1990s) was one of the only Catholic universities whose faculty/staff health insurance policies included coverage of birth control as a matter of course.  But the election year news coverage waved that practice in the cardinal's face, and he put a stop to it.

    Another interesting fact about BC: Back in the mid-1970s, an earlier BC administration threatened to shut down The Heights, BC's student-run newspaper, because the paper's staff made a decision to accept an ad from a local women's health clinic that also provided abortion services.  The editor of The Heights at that time was John E. McDonough (http://en.wikipedia.org/...), later a public health policy expert who advised Mitt Romney and the Mass. legislature on the creation of Romneycare, and then advised the Democrats in the US Senate on the creation of Obamacare.

    Some stories just keep circling around and around and around.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site