MUSG passes resolution opposing LGBTQ discrimination

Via The Tribune:

Tensions were high at the Marquette Student Government meeting Thursday as senators debated legislation about the social stigmatization of the LGBTQ community on campus. A resolution opposing discrimination of the LGBTQ community was approved unanimously, but more than an hour of debate centered on a proposed amendment related to Catholic teaching on homosexuality. Senator Bill Doerrer said he is glad the issue is receiving attention in the form of a resolution.

“I think it’s time that MUSG displays a message to coincide with its actions. This is a good first step in the right direction that will open the door so we can see where we can go with it,” said Doerrer, a senior in the College of Arts & Sciences. Senator Adam Ryback proposed an amendment to add to the resolution this statement: “Espousal of traditional Christian or specifically Catholic teaching on homosexuality, shall not, if done respectfully and in the appropriate context, be considered a ‘prejudicial attack’ or an expression of ‘prejudice.’”

Ryback, a sophomore in the College of Arts & Sciences, said support of the Catholic teaching might be considered an attack and MUSG cannot deny the fact that Marquette is a Catholic, Jesuit university. He said leaving the amendment out would leave room for ambiguity.

“This amendment was created solely for clarification of the Catholic teaching,” Ryback said. Senator Giuseppe Pappalardo said with a student population of 60 percent Catholic and 40 percent non-Catholic at Marquette, it is just as possible that non-Catholic students subject people to intentional and unintentional prejudicial attacks as it is that Catholic students might.

“We’re not saying everyone agrees with this (legislation),” said Pappalardo, a senior in the College of Arts & Sciences. “We’re saying 51.1 percent of the Marquette community agrees with this. Nowhere in this legislation are we taking a hit on the Catholic Church or on anybody’s views. I think this amendment would hurt the legislation.”

The motion to add the phrase amendment failed 23-4 and the motion to approve the resolution passed unanimously 27-0.


2 Responses

  1. The wording of that article is horrible. Can someone explain it to me in coherent words.

  2. Can I ask what the purpose of this resolution actually is? MU’s GSA lobbied like hell and successfully got sexual orientation added to the university’s non-discrimination policy in like 2002-ish… so isn’t that the university taking stand against LGBTQ discrimination in writing already?

    Don’t get me wrong, the university BLOWS when it comes to its treatment and understanding of LGBTQ people, but a resolution from MUSG means nothing. They passed one a few years ago recommending that the university starts offering domestic partner benefits for employees, and I’m sure Fr. Wild used said resolution to wipe his presidential behind.

    MUSG’s heart is in the right place, and as a former GSA President, I’m grateful for the support MUSG gives the university’s queer-friendly organizations and activities. But passing a resolution means nothing. If they want to make a real difference, they need to live the resolution, model the behavior the resolution stands for, and call people out when they don’t. A piece of paper solves nothing – but the action of living an accepting life and encouraging others to do the same speaks volumes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: