“Fifty years ago, no philosopher would have questioned that opposition to homosexual activity is ‘integrally related’ to the status of being a Christian.” Janie B. Cheaney
“Christian philosophy may be alive and well, but perhaps it had better watch its back.” Ibid.
Philosophy association approves a highly discriminatory nondiscrimination policy
The statement reads thus: “The American Philosophical Association rejects as unethical all forms of discrimination based on race, color, religion, political convictions, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, gender identification or age … [in all] professional activities in which APA members characteristically participate. This includes both discrimination on the basis of status and discrimination on the basis of conduct integrally connected to that status.” The statement, which I don’t have room to quote in full, goes on to define what “integrally connected” means-for example, “sexual conduct expressive of a sexual orientation.”
A sharp-eyed reader will grasp both the central issue and the embedded fallacy. The issue: An institution (such as a Christian college) that refuses hiring on the basis of homosexual practice is thereby discriminatory. The fallacy: If a non-discrimination policy includes religion in its list of protected categories, then any institution religiously opposed to hiring a practicing homosexual is itself discriminated against when its ads are rejected. Continue reading