Let's get a show of hands: How many of you have chanted ""Kill the bill"" or ""Scotty doesn't know"" at least once this week? Okay, now how many of you know that one of our campus student orgs is suing the university for discrimination, and the case is well on its way to the supreme court?
Probably not too many hands went up there, so here's some background: In September of 2007 Badger Catholic (then the Roman Catholic Foundation) levied a suit against UW after they were denied a portion of their requested funding for what they believed were discriminatory reasons.
Badger Catholic had a previous agreement with the university that their organization was to be funded on the same basis as all other organizations, despite their religious status. Some of their programs were denied funding again that year, and they believed the decision was a direct violation of their free speech and right to freely practice their religion. Evidently the federal courts agree.
So which programs did the university refuse to pay for? They include a summer evangelical retreat, a student counseling program with members of the clergy, the printing of rosary booklets and a few others. In short, the university rightly chose not to fund activities that consisted mainly of ""worship, prayer, or proselytizing."" It's a simple case of separation of church and state, right? Didn't we learn that in grade school? And yet, Badger Catholic claims that the university is trying to squash their right to practice their religion.
A few funding denials does not a discrimination make, however. According to the case's legal brief, 86 percent of Badger Catholic's proposed budget was approved and funded. The university's willingness to give them any money at all clearly shows this is not some evil plan to stomp out religious views on campus. This is not a ""you can't do that"" slap-in-the-face, but more of a ""you can do that, we're just not going to pay for it"" gentle pat.
If there's one thing most students on campus can agree on, it's that our segregated fees are high enough. With a limited amount of money to be given away, the university has rightfully strict guidelines to determine who can use our money and for what purpose. This leads to tough choices every year, and ultimately some programs just don't make the cut.
The funding guidelines rely on the ability of groups to provide necessary services to students and to present a forum for public discussion, neither of which the programs presented by Badger Catholic fulfill. Religion can be a great lens on a topic of public debate, and I would wholeheartedly encourage the university to fund a lecture such as ""Religion and Abortion Rights."" That makes for a good public discussion and interesting viewpoint you might not otherwise find on campus. But using my segregated fees to fund a religious evangelical retreat? There's just something wrong with that thought.
Doesn't Badger Catholic have a right to present their opinions on campus, though? Yes and no. The line between viewpoint and content discrimination is sometimes hard to walk, but the university seems to be doing so quite successfully here.
Viewpoint discrimination, or discrimination based on the speaker's point of view, is clearly unconstitutional. Therefore, if Badger Catholic had been denied funds for religious activities while a Jewish student org, for example, was awarded them, they would have a fair First Amendment case.
However, by not funding any purely religious activities, the university is just choosing to remove the whole topic from the table. Content discrimination does not violate any part of the Constitution, as the university has every right to decide which topics are off limits—as long as they are off limits to Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and everyone else.
The university did not tread on anyone's constitutional rights in the case. Instead, UW followed its own funding guidelines to the letter just like they do for all other student organizations. It's unlikely the Supreme Court will even take up the case. But if they do, let's hope they reverse the lower court decisions and maintain the objective principles every public school should be built upon.
Lydia Statz is a junior majoring in journalism and international studies. Please send all responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
