A letter written by University President Rev. William P. Leahy, S.J.,defending the school's stance to not change the University's nondiscrimination policy has evoked a variety of responses from the student body.
Eighty-four percent of those who voted on the referendum in early March chose to add sexual orientation to the nondiscrimination policy.
"Personally I was very happy that he was able to write a statement to the BC community, that was really needed," said Nick Salter, director of domestic affairs for the Undergraduate Government of Boston College (UGBC) and A&S '07. "I think it's an important step to affirming the human dignity of every person on this campus."
The letter said that the issue should be resolved with discourse and shared respect, despite apparent differences in opinion.
"I know that some do not agree with the University's position regarding the nondiscrimination clause, and I regret that. But I hope we can continue to engage in dialogue about ways in which we can underscore our basic commitment to the dignity of every member of the BC community," wrote Leahy in the March 17 edition of The Heights.
Communication is something both parties are looking to maintain.
"A vast majority of students from all different backgrounds, conservatives and liberals alike, have engaged in the issue and want dialogue to support the GLBT community on campus," said Michael Yaksich, director of GLBT issues for the UGBC and A&S '05.
Earlier in the semester, UGBC officials met with Leahy and discussed the issue. In accordance with the letter, officials will convene with Joe Herlihy, general counsel, in the next week "to discuss how our policy of nondiscrimination can be made more welcoming and affirming, while safeguarding the University's freedom to remain faithful to its religious identity and mission."
While Salter said he appreciated the letter, he had trouble with certain passages that he felt were overly vague and sometimes misleading.
Leahy mentioned that the discriminatory harassment policy protects individuals from being targeted because of their sexual orientation. Salter said, however, the harassment and nondiscrimination policies are two different things.
"It is certainly confusing," he said. "I don't know if it was his intention, but he is referring to harassment policy, and we have to understand that discrimination can be in other ways besides harassment."
Another passage in the letter was overly vague, said both Yaksich and Salter.
"I realize that some in our community believe that BC should include 'sexual orientation' in its nondiscrimination clause," wrote Leahy.
"However, adding the words 'sexual orientation' could result in outside authorities interpreting the nondiscrimination clause in ways that would require BC to approve and fund initiatives or activities that conflict with its institutional commitments," he added.
"I don't know what specifically they think they would have to fund," said Salter. "We have been asking for specifics but we continue to get vague answers."
Other students agreed with Salter's point. Kate Cournoyer, A&S '08, characterized Leahy's passage as "vague" and "beating around the bush."
"I was appalled when I heard it wasn't in the policy in the first place," said Cournoyer.
Nathaniel Campbell, A&S '07, was one of the 16 percent that voted "no" in the referendum. He approved the administration making their position clear.
"While the change would be completely within the mandates of Ignatian spirituality and Catholic identity of the University, it could possibly put the University in the legal position where they would be forced to recognize and fund student groups that go against the Catholic identity," he said.
Still, some maintain that the letter shows a negative side of BC. "Boston College is a Jesuit school that represents its traditions," said Kristen Lewandowski, A&S '08. "But one of the reasons that I almost didn't come here was because I heard it was homophobic. It seems like an attitude that the administration has advocated."
Be the first to comment on this article!