personally i think the law society should only be focused on denying accreditation if the school is deficient in the program it offers/teaches. ones lifestyle choice shouldn't come into the equation. how do they account for people that attend accdredited schools who potentially have highly bigoted or racist opinions that are far more exculsionary than those of the twu coventat which does not limit who can go but just how they conduct themselves while they attend the university?
I see your point - and agree somewhat. There is no perfect answer to this situation. WE can only hope that those who chose to approach the bar are of a higher moral standard than that, and that those who are not, but instead foster bigotted opinions in hiding, will eventually be outed for who they are - or more likely end up working to defend the Hell's Angels.
The point that pisses off most people is the arrogance of TWU (read christians) - that it will always continue to promote its anti-LGBT agenda (as most christian based organizations will) in spite of modern society's declaration that LGBT must be accepted as equals. For a christian organization to embrace LGBT would be somewhat blasphemous….but we know the bible is widely open to selective interpretation..The action of Law society members is one way of pushing back against Christian indoctrination - and of sending yet another message that the selective views and practices of christian organizations, as dictated by the Holeeeee-book , will not be tolerated by general populations any longer….at least here in BC.
so maybe this action is impacting on religious freedoms/discriminating against religion…but so what? When you're right, you're right. As far as I am concerned, religious freedom is a crock. IT only serves as a mean for religions to impose their views on others.
But im a pastafarian….so i digress.
All hail FSM.