Federal Court Gets it Right
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Gets it Right
by Supporting Julea Ward’s Religious Freedom
Nearly finished with her graduate studies in counseling at Eastern Michigan University, Julea Ward was given a client who sought advice for a same-sex relationship. Julea knew that she could not affirm the client’s position and asked to refer the client to another counselor. This request eventually led to her being expelled from the program.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals’ opinion acknowledges what many of you already concluded:
| Here too, what did Ward do wrong? Ward was willing to work with all clients and to respect the school’s affirmation directives in doing so. That is why she asked to refer gay and lesbian clients (and some heterosexual clients) if the conversation required her to affirm their sexual practices. What more could the rule require? Surely, for example, the ban on discrimination against clients based on their religion (1) does not require a Muslim counselor to tell a Jewish client that his religious beliefs are correct if the conversation takes a turn in that direction and (2) does not require an atheist counselor to tell a person of faith that there is a God if the client is wrestling with faithbased issues. Tolerance is a two-way street. Otherwise, the rule mandates orthodoxy, not anti-discrimination. |
This is just one more example of the dangers of anti-discrimination laws based on someone’s sexual behavior. The school’s response shows that anti-discrimination tends to look more like forced affirmation than some care to acknowledge.
