Bible Belt?

Shouldn’t this issue be causing riots and protests?

OK, lets follow the rule’s logic all the way. Since every student in the dorm is subsidized by state and federal funds (for the naive, even the out-of-state student paying ultra-high tuition out of his or her own pocket does not cover the actual costs), so, while not paid, they are subsidized. Thus the rule must cover everyone equally. Second, do these RAs get paid 24/7? If so, I bet they are very happy (at 6.00 an hour, that is 16,000 per semester, for 12 months, its about 53,000). Nice job. You know, the employer-employee situtation never seems to be a two way street. The RA is paid to complete specific tasks. Once those tasks are finished, the RA is a student. If the pay is 24/7/52, then that may be a different story. My guess is that it is not.

Off to the riots.

MDG, at 9:00 am EST on March 2, 2006

“Thus the rule must cover everyone equally.”

Except that non-RAs tend to pay for their room, which typically (unlike things such as in-state tuition) is not heavily subsidized by the state. And unlike scholarship students, the provision of a dorm room by the college (as opposed to apartment rent) is a sine qua non for the job. That, coupled with the RA’s role, is what makes it troubling. In a sense, it is akin to a psychologist hired by a college arguing that he can hold church services in his office while recruiting patients to his congregation.

While the RA has free exercise rights, requiring other arrangements places a minimal infringement on those rights. He or she can easily hold meetings in other parts of the dorm or allow others to host. And before someone claims that religious campus activities are being discriminated against, think for a second. How many times did your chess club meet or the tennis team practice in a RA’s room?

Just me, at 9:40 am EST on March 2, 2006

No One Ever Happy with Getting Their Way

Yes, I agree with people who say these “RA” people should be able to host their religious meetings. HOWEVER, in my experience, particularly in religious affiliates in United States, when given a centimeter, a meter is taken. In as much I mean that when I visit campus in US I have once been stopped and invited to such “Bible study.” I say, “No, thank you.” The person reply that I would be “better” for coming to the Bible study. I say, “No, thank you.” The person then tell me that I will be “worse” for NOT coming to the Bible study. That is not friendly or nice to say to me. They mean no harm to me, but it seem to me that questions of religion in United States is never about what actually is minor problem, is always a doorway into bigger issue that certain group wish to have addressed. Remind me of Plessy versus Ferguson case in US Civil Rights. The issue was absolutely not only about where one could sit in a train. If issue at hand was hosting Bible study in room, why not, as earlier posting say, hold in a different room, or have a different host. If the Bible study has only one person in group there is no one to host other than “RA,” however, there is also no one to study with.

Gregoriy Ermolaevich Morgunov, China, We Got Next, at 11:15 am EST on March 2, 2006

The reasoning behind the original policy was that the RAs are representing their employer the state, which itself should not endorse one religion over another. I agree that if they therefore are considered to be on the job 24/7 then they ought to be paid for every second.

That the University provides their housing is a red herring: Privacy and basic dignity demand that their living quarters and their workplace (the rest of the dorm) be separate.

Samwise, at 12:40 pm EST on March 2, 2006

Power

RAs have authority over dorm residents. Just as a professor should not take advantage of his position to influence impressionable students, or seduce them, neither should an RA. Having Bible study in one’s room when it would be possible to attend Bible study in the dorm’s lounge opens the possibility for religious seduction. If it is not unconstitutional, it is certainly unethical.

Hoseph Duemer, Professor at Clartkson, at 9:30 pm EST on March 2, 2006

Legoland

Actually, religion is often dirty and distasteful. Look at a newspaper. Or check the Old Testament. (A handy site for the dirtier and more distasteful bits is www.thebricktestament.com, a brilliant retelling of Bible storys using Lego blocks.)

Bogolov, at 12:45 pm EST on March 3, 2006

Prof. Cato

I don’t believe you should artificially separate the believers from their religion. Religion is not some pure platonic idea – it is what is actually in people’s heads. Religious people often behave despicably precisely because of what they believe – the true hypocrite is rare. An obvious example: If I absolutely believe that you will go to hell and suffer eternal torment unless you convert to “my” religion, I would be ethically compelled to do practically ANYTHING to accomplish your conversion (you’ll thank me for it in heaven). My actions would not be “pernicious” or “self-serving” (in my own mind, anyway). Nevertheless it is this sort of absolutist thinking that causes much of the suffering in the world.

Anyway, a student who allows a RA to “seduce” him into religion is probably inclined that way in the first place – honestly I don’t believe it’s a big deal – if it didn’t happen there it would somewhere else. My recollection of dorm life (many decades ago) is that the RAs were pretty annoying people in the first place. Right-thinking students avoided them.

Bogolov, at 3:35 pm EST on March 3, 2006

The issue of church and state aside, RAs hosting bible studies in their rooms raises other issues. If one important RA role is to promote, acceptance, and understanding, how are these sessions going to be perceived by the residents? Will a resident hesitate to contact his/her RA with questions or problems about sex, drinking, sexual persuasion? Will a resident feel judged (regardless of the reality) if their parents are divorced? Will a resident hide their need for prescription drugs or therapy? Will his/her politics preclude them from feeling accepted? Will there be a perception that residents attending these sessions are favored? Will a Muslim, Jewish, atheist or Morman student feel shut out by someone who is suppose to be their first line of support in the hall? It is becoming more and more difficult to engage residents in traditional programming and roommate/suitemate conflicts are on the rise. Why in the world would we want to invite more isolation? Yes, everyone has a choice, but is it your experience that the average freshman, in particular, has the emotional development, to acknowledge this act of freewill (choosing or no choosing to attend the session) without judging or feeling judged?

Mobius, at 10:20 am EST on March 8, 2006