I cannot believe that there still exists a debate over the Tufts Christian Fellowship's (TCF) treatment of Julie Catalano. The TCU Judiciary's original decision, however behind-the-scenes it may have been, should stand.
The fact of the matter is that Julie Catalano was discriminated against because she is bisexual. While Jon Crowe, in his Viewpoint ("Unsafe?" 9/13) tries to explain his organization's decision through the teachings of Christ, among other things, he seems to forget that the policy of this University is not to discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation. If this were a Jesuit institution, perhaps the case might be different. But Tufts has no official religious affiliation. Thus TCF should abide by this policy, because it is a school-funded organization. Actually, since it derives most of its funding from every student's Student Activities Fee, it is more accurately described as a student-funded organization. That means that you and I are giving money to TCF. I am furious that any of our money goes to an organization that bases important decisions on sexual orientation. I agree with Mr. Crowe, that chalkings and paintings are not the best way to deal with this situation; nonetheless, TCF should simply not get any more of our money.
Mr. Crowe's assertion that "inviting her into a leadership position would require affirming her belief which was not something [TCF] could do," is a questionable one, indeed. Not only is this rather absurd, but if everybody on any sort of rule-making body, i.e. the TCF Senior Leaders, believes the exact same thing, then there is no point in having a group of people making decisions when one person could do the job. Furthermore, Mr. Crowe also said that "for Tufts to enforce... acceptance... of any and all interpretations... violates freedom of religion." Through a simple comparison, we can understand that this, too, is nonsensical. There are Jews and Muslims on this campus. However, Tufts does not offer strictly Kosher meals every day of the week, and alcohol is served at the Campus Center. These non-Christian "interpretations," as Mr. Crowe calls them, are not obeyed by Tufts University, yet by his logic, they should be. However, I seriously doubt he would deem these acts violations of religious freedom.
Let me be clear: I am not Christian, and I am not homosexual. I have never met Julie Catalano. One needs only to have read her Letter to the Editor in last Thursday's Daily, to understand how ridiculously she has been treated. She was given "reparative" therapy, because as a homosexual, she needed to be "healed" in the minds of TCF. People, the year is 2000. Homosexuals are more accepted in mainstream America than ever before; there are homosexuals in every line of work, in every walk of life, as well as in Congress (including Rep. Barney Frank, Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts). It is okay to be gay. Almost all of the Tufts Community, along with the great majority of society in general, has come to this simple conclusion. Yet, TCF still has not.
The issue of her leadership position, or lack thereof, in TCF does not directly affect me at all. I do, however, object to any organization that makes decisions based on sexual orientation. While Mr. Crowe maintains "she was not rejected or discriminated against," he says that her being in a position of any importance in TCF became "a complicated issue." I must compleiment Mr. Crowe on his article, for it is quite well written, and for his skill in using clever language to tiptoe around the main issue. A fine effort, Mr. Crowe, but face it - TCF denied her a position of importance because she is bisexual, and I, for one, do not want any more student money going to TCF until it changes.
Daniel Kramer is a sophomore majoring in Economics
