Court case against Cambridge College - philosophical and religious belief

[PinkDodgems]

Fitzwilliam College refused to allow a Christian group to hold its conference there because, in the words of its lawyer:
"college staff had conducted internet research about Christian Concern, which “gave rise to concerns about the reaction of the college’s students if the booking was accepted”, he said, adding that the claimant’s booking was rejected on the grounds that it is “not compatible with the values of the college”.
www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/christian-group-blocked-from-holding-conference-at-cambridge-college/ar-AA11SrcJ?ocid

Interesting. The amount of nutty religious groups they have in situ in Cambridge Uni. What have this lot done wrong?

When will the grown ups tell these idiot students to grow up and get over themselves

They have every right to be homophobic, anti-Islam, and pro-abstinence sex ed (or should that be anti-women? Anti-science?). They even have the right to be close with Nigel Farage.

However it's not very surprising that a college full of young people might not want to offer them space in which to be all those things.

The conference wouldn't have been when the students are in college. Cambridge colleges boot the students out for 6 months of the year and make money out of conference groups.

Are they planning on refusing any bookings from the Catholic Church next? Or more orthodox Jewish or Muslim groups?

I sometimes wonder if people who think this way ever consider what the long term outcomes might be of making so many people and groups feel that they are simply alienated from the culture at large. Because typically when groups find themselves in that position it does come to have social consequences over time.

So some students who won't be there on the day don't want the university to take a paid for conference booking in case they get hurt feelings and the university went along with this?
I really don't understand this idea that if you are not in agreement with other people's views you can't accept them. Where is the critical thinking and why do the universities cower all the time. Who wants to send their children to a university that doesn't stand up to bullys.
The list is growing:
Cambridge
Loughborough
Sussex and many more...shall we make a proper list?

I sometimes wonder if people who think this way ever consider what the long term outcomes might be of making so many people and groups feel that they are simply alienated from the culture at large. Because typically when groups find themselves in that position it does come to have social consequences over time.

I see so many parallels with the Reformation - Catholics who retained their beliefs (which everyone had shared previously) suddenly finding they are barred from certain positions etc. Andrew Doyle was right to call them the New Puritans.

No, it's worse than that. The students didn't know about the proposed conference. No complaints were received. But the college did some research on the beliefs of the group that applied to the college for some conference space (which would have been in the university vacation period) and said no on the grounds that students MIGHT find out about the conference and some of them MIGHT then complain. This quote is from what the college representative told the court:
"college staff had conducted internet research about Christian Concern, which “gave rise to concerns about the reaction of the college’s students if the booking was accepted”"

I see that the College has made a statement. The claim is going ahead in the County Court:
www.fitz.cam.ac.uk/news/statement-regarding-christian-concern

They have every right to be homophobic, anti-Islam, and pro-abstinence sex ed (or should that be anti-women? Anti-science?). They even have the right to be close with Nigel Farage. However it's not very surprising that a college full of young people might not want to offer them space in which to be all those things.

I don't like a think CC stand for. I think they are anti trans, rather than merely worried about the societal issues of self ID.

Still, if a university isn't the place for their views to be discussed and debated, then where is? They don't advocate violence, don't promote discrimination and millions of people share their views. The idea that no 'young people' share these views is silly.

Here is some interesting information on Christian Concern's views. They are certainly views which won't coincide with the views of many Cambridge students, although there will certainly be some students who hold those views (it looks like an American style Evangelical Christian viewpoint):
christianconcern.com/issues/

Really? It's for use as a conference venue, they're not refusing to allow them as students.

Should a university have to host - and lend its prestige - to a group against inter-racial marriage, for example? Because if not, then I can't see why they should have to do the same for a group that is vocally anti same sex marriage and womens' rights to healthcare.

Should a university have to host - and lend its prestige - to a group against inter-racial marriage, for example?

No, because I suspect racist views would not be WORIADS, and therefore do not fall under the protection of the Equality Act. I haven't looked at this group's beliefs so can't comment specifically, but the idea that a college can pick and choose which people to provide a service to, based on those people's protected beliefs, is wrong. The college is operating as a business and therefore is bound by equality law - and it is certainly not a defence to say that their students might feel inclined to discriminate and so they have no choice.

From a quick look at their website, they're the beliefs you'd expect from an evangelical Christian group, American style. Anti-abortion, anti-transgender, anti-gay marriage, etc.
When I was at an English uni a few decades ago, this kind of viewpoint was heavily represented in student Christian groups. It may still be - I don't know. It is currently a very popular viewpoint in the United States.
It worries me that a university (in this case college) thinks it's appropriate or necessary to check the website of someone asking to hire conference facilities during the university vacation for 5 days, to check that the organisation's views are in tune with what they consider to be the majority views of their students. And that they are seeking to pre-empt any possible student complaint. If they turn down this conference, then why not a conference by a Muslim organisation (their views are highly unlikely to be in tune with majority Cambridge student views)?

Of course they have to check who they’re hosting, otherwise they get in the situation another uni did a few years back when they hosted a pro-eugenics group. They can’t be seen to endorse that viewpoint. And saying ‘what if it was a Muslim group’ is pure whataboutery. It wasn’t a Muslim group. And frankly I doubt they would host any hardline religious group, for the same reasons.

There are exceptions to the protected characteristic of belief under the Equality Act which apply to any beliefs which are not considered worthy of respect in a democratic society, e.g. (I imagine) eugenics, racism, Holocaust denialism, the fundamental inferiority of women, etc etc. This group may or may not express analogous beliefs, and if they do they can legally be discriminated against on that basis, and should lose their case. But what is worrying is the general trend for businesses not only to assume they can discriminate on the basis of any and all beliefs (I.e. against beliefs they or their clientele simply disagree with) but that they should. I sincerely hope the college has had legal advice and is confident it has stronger grounds than "if our students found out they wouldn't like it".

Only LGBTthink will be permitted in future. Everyone else will be banned and they will rule over us.

The college know they made the wrong decision. That's why they later offered the conference facilities. That late offer was refused.

I think that's a very slippery slope.

I disagree. It's not whataboutery, it's discrimination which requires a comparator. If this was a Muslim or Orthodox Jewish group I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have been refused.

I disagree. It's not whataboutery, it's discrimination which requires a comparator. If this was a Muslim or Orthodox Jewish group I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have been refused.

Really? I'd suspect that a fundamentalist Muslim group that spent its time launching high profile legal challenges at womens' right to abortion and gay rights to marriage, all with a stated aim to make Britain more Islamic, would very likely have met with the same challenges.

A Cambridge college is in a different position than a hotel or hireable conference venue, because being able to say that an event is taking place within the Cambridge University gives it (rightly or wrongly) a certain amount of legitimacy and authority.

People are allowed to have different viewpoints about marriage or abortion, and discuss them, and how they think they could put forward their views politically.

That's how a democracy works.

It's really important to understand this, when people don't want a college or a library to host a meeting of feminists talking about pushing back against self-id, or maybe changes to the GRA, or whatever, in their view it is exactly the same thing. That it is giving a platform and legitimacy to an immoral viewpoint looking to affect government.

When we are to a point that a group that believes human rights apply to human beings who are still in the womb can't meet to discuss the political implications of that, because it's a view "not worthy of respect," there are a lot of other viewpoints that could be shut down as well.

They are explicitly anti-Islam.

In what sense? Are they trying to get it banned?

If not, surely any Christian organisation is anti-Islam by definition?

If the UK had something like the US's First Amendment things would be clearer on the free speech issue. That said, IADNAL and in this particular instance I'm not sure where Cambridge University (or its individual colleges) would stand if we did.