Comments on: Campus Christian groups loses appeal at Supreme Court

By: John

John — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:41:48 +0000

It's a clear and right decision: if they want to be recognized at this *public* university, they must not restrict their membership. Clear as a bell.

The four theocratic justices got it wrong.

By: bobden

bobden — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:34:25 +0000

That group should not be calling itself a "Christian" group. They are not Christians. Christians do not exclude anyone. They INclude everyone, or they are not Christians.

By: phoenix86

phoenix86 — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:31:08 +0000

Pretty funny since no where in the Constitution does it say "seperation of Church and State".

However, I wonder if California would have taken this position had it been Islam instead of Christianity. I guess no.

By: Al-NY,NY

Al-NY,NY — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:13:37 +0000

Just wait for the "Anti-Christian" blather from the usual talking heads..It's a pubic school so no $ churchies. Form your own school or go to one of the other "Christian" schools where they can discriminate.

By: S.B. Stein E.B. NJ

S.B. Stein E.B. NJ — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:07:23 +0000

Is it really a surprise? It is a private group asking for public money. Free speech only goes so far.

By: ysidero

ysidero — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:01:08 +0000

Suppose this had been a Muslim religious group that required all members to adhere to its "core principles"? Or a LGBTQ group? I have no doubt the dissenters would have been in favor of limiting their rights. Roberts, et al, need to step back from their exclusively "Christian" world view and recognize that right-wing "Christian" groups have no more rights than anyone else.

By: ThinkAgain

ThinkAgain — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:59:08 +0000

This is a public university – and this decision was correct. The Christian campus group wanted to discriminate, which is clearly not allowed at the university.

I don't see a problem with this ruling.

By: rita

rita — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:58:14 +0000

It is hard to imagine where we would be today in our social endeavors in this country without liberal members of the Supreme Court. The small conservative men on the Supreme Court are determined to remain small. Their ideology pulls the wagon and their critical thinking is in a jar in the wagon.

By: Alvino

Alvino — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:57:22 +0000

Doesn't Justice Alito know this country is NOT a theocracy? Or maybe he wants it to be. Shame on him.

By: Dee

Dee — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:56:57 +0000

Honestly, after all the time and money I'm sure this cost, what are the practical applications of this ruling? Who is going to join this group if they don't believe what it teaches?

By: chuck

chuck — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:53:29 +0000

Conservatives will always be on the wrong side of gay rights by siding with those who wish to deny that these people are deserving Americans and deserving of all of its liberties. The case was framed around an organizations right to exclude individuals who are not like minded within a club at a public school, but the core of the case dealt with the clubs desire to continue the christian status quo of denying anyone who doesn't believe all of the tenants of their christian doctrine. The public shool's anti-discrimination policies usurp a small clubs desire to exclude – their desire to usurp the school rules. The club painted themselves as the victim and at least 5 educated members of the United States Supreme Court saw their true colors and voted against them. We are on a snails pace to equality – no thanks to christians or their benefactors on the Supreme Court.

By: witch56

witch56 — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:51:42 +0000

at least they got this one right!

By: Matthew

Matthew — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:42:09 +0000

How horrible! A group wants to be recognized for who they are, what they believe, and wish to interact with those of similiar beliefs! I mean seriously, what IS this country coming to when we can't even create groups of like-minded people! Anti-discriminatory rules are really starting to get out of hand. Pretty soon, "Men Only" and "Women Only" groups won't be able to exist because they are discriminatory.

By: limits its core membership to those who share its beliefs on faith and marriage

limits its core membership to those who share its beliefs on faith and marriage — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:42:09 +0000

I totally agree with this ruling

By: La Piovra

La Piovra — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:40:42 +0000

However, if that group doesn't like that ruling, they can always incorporate themselves, since corporations, as "persons", doubtless now have the right to bear arms. At that point, they can make the university an offer it can't refuse.

By: Victim of George W's ECONOMY

Victim of George W's ECONOMY — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:39:19 +0000

Silly Christians......MYTHS are for kids!!

Don't these fools realize that THIS IS their armaghedon. Their world as they knew it, HAS CHANGED. The Christians arent' equiped to evolve with the rest of us.

They have to learn to adapt to a life of love and inclussion, NOT HATE AND DISCRIMINATION.

Silly, silly Christians.......

By: hobart

hobart — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:35:44 +0000

Finally, the court gets one right. To all those liberals dissatisfied with Obama, or those who voted for Nader and indirectly for Bush in 2000, this is the consequence of a Republican administration. Our current Supreme Court verges on fascism. The so called conservatives on the Supreme Court are the most activist set of judges to serve in our Nation's history. They vote as a block on everything, without a single original thought that let's us know that they are four individual people.

Why do justices Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas hate America?

By: al in memphis

al in memphis — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:29:48 +0000

What has it come to when an extreme political group has a better chance of being recognized by the university than it is for a christian group.
What we fear most are those things that challenge our consciences and our own self-described level of what is moral.

By: Dano

Dano — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:21:00 +0000

Why is it that Christian groups have such a hard time understanding that public money cannot be spent on promoting religious beliefs? Despite what the hard right wing of the court says, this is not preventing anyone from expressing their religion. No one said you can't meet with like minded people and pray to the God you believe in. They're just saying that if you accept public money - and using the facilities at a public university to promote your cause & recruit members is accepting public money - your group can't exclude everyone that doesn't share your beliefs. It 's no different than an athiest or non-Christian group refusing to allow Christians to join their club.

By: E T Widener

E T Widener — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:20:43 +0000

This makes about as much sense as a golfer joining the tennis club. I doubt that an atheist would be interested in joining a christian club. What narrow minded vision.