Opinion
February 5
In the fall of 2012, the Tufts Community Union Judiciary (TCUJ) derecognized the Tufts Christian Fellowship (TCF) on the grounds of failure to comply with the TCUJ non-discrimination policy in its process for electing officers. The TCF later appealed to the Committee on Student Life (CSL), a standing faculty committee whose members include students as well as faculty. The CSL upheld the ruling on the grounds that the TCUJ acted appropriately according to existing rules of process in the TCU Constitution, and then developed a new policy that attempted to better meet the needs of Tufts multi-faceted community on this complex issue. The CSL developed a minimum set of requirements under which religious doctrine could lead to an allowable departure from the TCUJ non-discrimination policy. The resulting policy still required all religious student organizations to allow all comers as members, but it allowed an organization to apply for a justified departure from the TCUJ non-discrimination policy in determining eligibility for leadership positions. A justified departure required two ingredients: approval by the Tufts University Chaplaincy and complete transparency on the part of the organization about who could and could not run in leadership elections. Those of us on the CSL felt at the time that these rules would allow religious student organizations to live their doctrines in harmony with the spirit of the TCUJ non-discrimination policy. The CSL approved this policy on Dec. 5, 2012. While some felt that the ruling struck an appropriate balance, others did not. There was particular concern that this ruling opened the door to discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation and religion. The TCU Senate passed a resolution asking the CSL to rescind the justified departure policy. The Equal Educational Opportunity Committee (EEOC), a faculty committee that also includes students and staff, urged a reconsideration of the policy. The Tufts University Chaplaincy also came to a consensus view that religious student organizations should comply with the TCUJ all-comers non-discrimination policy. In the meantime, no student organization applied for recognition based upon a justified departure. There was also a subtle but profound shift in the CSLs own thinking about the purpose of the policy governing participation in religious student organizations. Is a religious student organization primarily a chapter of an external religious community, the committee asked, or is it a group of Tufts students whose purposes include exploring and learning about a religion as well as practicing it? We began with the premise that religious student organizations are primarily Tufts chapters of external religious communities. Over time, however, evidence grew in favor of the latter interpretation: an organic group of Tufts students in which religion can be explored even by non-believers or members of different faiths as well as practiced. In the latter interpretation, these organizations should be fully open to all students, rather than partially exclusive. This realization led the CSL to re-evaluate the student organization policy. If religious student organizations are fundamentally student organizations, then they must comply with the TCUJ non-discrimination policy with which other student organizations must comply. In modifying the policy we also wanted to acknowledge student organizations that are not necessarily religious but that explore personal fulfillment and enlightenment. These organizations such as the Tufts Freethought Society had always been regarded in the same TCUJ category but not explicitly mentioned in the policy. Thus, on Dec. 6, 2013, the CSL approved a new policy that includes both kinds of student organizations and refers to them as Religious and Philosophical Student Organizations (RPSOs). In creating the RPSO policy, the CSL did not fully overturn its decision of Dec. 5, 2012. Rather, we modified it in significant ways. The new policy removes justified departures and requires all RPSOs seeking TCUJ recognition to conform to the TCUJ all-comers non-discrimination policy for election of officers, in harmony with the Tufts University non-discrimination policy. At the same time, the revised policy continues to mandate total transparency on the part of all student organizations about their mission and purpose, refines and codifies the role of the TCUJ and Tufts University Chaplaincy in recognition decisions, and explicitly empowers the TCUJ to deny or revoke recognition if these guidelines are violated. Importantly, student organizations can continue to select the best leaders for themselves, through a democratic election or other process, but they cannot exclude students from eligibility based on their membership in a protected category. All students must be able to run for leadership in all organizations. 12
