News
March 27
With "sexual orientation" a part of Tufts' nondiscrimination policy since the 1990s, legal discrimination against the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community at Tufts has been virtually a non-issue for over a decade. However, other schools continue in their attempts to reach a consensus on the matter. A group of about 75 to 100 students at Boston College (BC), a Jesuit institution, are attempting to add "sexual orientation" to their institution's nondiscrimination policy. The central voice of opposition to this effort is Boston College President Father William Leahy, who said he believes that by altering BC's nondiscrimination policy in such a way would result in negative and unintended consequences for the University. In a recent letter Leahy wrote to The Heights, BC's student newspaper, he said that, "Our religious and intellectual heritage requires that we be an inclusive, welcoming community," and that "certainly no one should be harassed or abused because of their sexual orientation." Leahy said, however, that adding "sexual orientation" to the nondiscrimination clause would possibly result in the loss of some of BC's autonomy. Further in his letter, Leahy wrote, "...adding the words 'sexual orientation' could result in outside authorities interpreting the nondiscrimination clause in ways that would require BC to approve and fund initiatives or activities that conflict with its institutional commitments." "We are simply reserving our rights under state law and upholding the teaching of the Catholic Church upon which this University is founded," Boston College spokesperson Jack Dunn told the Heights. "We seek to explain to students that to include this provision would not only contradict church teaching but would mean that our decisions could be measured by the civil courts which are unfamiliar with church doctrine." Leahy's stance is not a popular one among BC students and faculty. A referendum to add "sexual orientation" to the University's nondiscrimination policy revealed that, of the 4,053 students who voted, over 84 percent desired its addition. Two hundred faculty members also voiced their agreement with those students. According to BC freshman Ben Higgins, a student actively involved in this effort, Leahy's rationale is not convincing. "This just seems to be an issue of social justice, to extend basic rights to everyone on campus. It's such a simple thing to do, and I don't understand [the administration's] justification," he said. "They've been really vague about what their justification is." Similarly, sophomore Nick Salter, who also serves as director of Domestic Issues on the Undergraduate Government of Boston College, said he believes that Leahy's stance is not fostering the inclusion that Catholic doctrines espouse. "We're not sure what Father Leahy is talking about," Salter said. "Catholics should not discriminate based on sexual orientation, and, in fact, the Catholic argument [for inclusion and acceptance] seems to support this policy change." Higgins highlighted the fact that altering the nondiscrimination policy would not interfere with the Catholic stance on other issues such as gay marriage. "We're not asking them to advocate homosexuality, we just want to eliminate discrimination," Higgins said. Salter said that his ultimate goal is just that. "We're seeking full and equal protection for all students at BC," he said. The current policy, Salter said, is somewhat hypocritical. "On the one hand you have Jesuit talk of human dignity and equality, and on the other hand you have the institution wanting to legally discriminate," Salter said. An editorial in the Heights reported that of the nation's 28 Jesuit colleges and universities, 20 have included sexual orientation in their nondiscrimination policies. Students involved in these efforts have reached out to students at other local universities. In an e-mail that Higgins wrote to several Tufts students, including a number of Tufts Community Union (TCU) senators, student media organizations and the Tufts Transgender, Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Collective, he requests that Tufts students send letters to Leahy and attend an April 8 rally in support of the nondiscrimination policy changes. "Most Jesuit institutions have moved in a more progressive direction. BC is an exception, unfortunately," said Matthew Pohl, a senior TCU senator and recipient of Higgins' e-mail. "Students at BC overwhelmingly support adding sexual orientation, and some would probably argue that doing so wouldn't hurt BC's identity as a religious institution. Even Notre Dame had added it, which honestly shocked me." BC senior Michael Yaksich, who serves as Director of LGBT issues on the Undergraduate Government of Boston College, said that the debate's primary catalyst is interpretation. "The difference between the two camps is how you interpret the doctrine and how it would affect the University," he said. Although he said he fully appreciates and understands Father Leahy's stance on the matter, "our interpretation of it and most others' is that by including 'sexual orientation' in the nondiscrimination policy would not force the school to do anything it wouldn't want to," Yaksich said. As an example of such a scenario, Yaksich said there is the possibility of BC being legally obligated to support a pro-abortion group on its Jesuit campus, based on a revised nondiscrimination policy. Students supporting the addition of "sexual orientation" into the nondiscrimination policy at BC are slated to distribute T-shirts, petitions and organize a rally next month. Considering it a "hot issue on campus," Yaksich said that "this will always be an issue at BC, whether ['sexual orientation'] is put into the nondiscrimination policy or not."
