Get it STRAIGHT

USG overlooked substantial reasons for chartering group

"As an academic community, The Pennsylvania State University is committed to the protection and preservation of the free search for truth; the freedom of thought, inquiry, and speech; and the freedom to hear, examine, debate alternative theories, data, and views. These are fundamental rights, which must be practiced, protected, and promoted by the University."

-- from Penn State's policy statement on free expression

The Undergraduate Supreme Court recently denied a charter to STRAIGHT, a group that says it refuses to support or accept homosexuality. Regardless of any personal feelings about STRAIGHT or its members' beliefs, it was vitally important Penn State protect STRAIGHT's right to be chartered.

The court tried hard to balance University policies fairly, but failed miserably. Here is a point-by-point explanation. It's a bit technical, but very important:

• The court ruled that chartering STRAIGHT would conflict with Penn State's policy statement on intolerance.
  

  This is perhaps the biggest exaggeration and misinterpretation throughout the whole STRAIGHT debate.
  

  The University's intolerance policy specifically refers to "an attitude, feeling or belief wherein an individual or group shows contempt for other individuals or groups." Students Reinforcing Adherence in General Heterosexual Tradition has never expressed contempt for people. They have stressed that they oppose homosexual actions, but that they do not oppose homosexual people.
  

  (For instance, you could hate some action your best friend does, but that doesn't mean you hate your best friend.)
  

  STRAIGHT has gone out of its way to say it opposes gay-bashing and other actions that attack individuals, and that it does not welcome gay-bashers.
  

• The court stated: "When a group is approved as an official Penn State University organization by the Court, the power and prestige of the University is put behind the recognized organization. . . . To put the power and prestige of the University behind STRAIGHT by approving the group would have put the University in a bad light. The Court is dedicated to at least maintaining the good name of the University."
  

  Are they serious?
  

  If this were true, then the University could not charter any group that opposed the University in any way. Goodbye USG! Goodbye Council of Commonwealth Student Governments! Goodbye Association of Residence Hall Students! Goodbye Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Student Alliance!
  

  If student groups had to put the University in a good light, then there would be no need for student opinion on campus. We all could just dance the Macarena and join the Graham Spanier Club. If the USG Supreme Court really believes groups must always put the University in a good light, then they have no choice but to disband USG.
  

• The court ruled that STRAIGHT would not "have been a benefit to the University in any substantial way."
  

  STRAIGHT's charter calls for an official and formal organization in which students can express their views regarding their refusal to accept or support homosexuality. Those viewpoints may be shallow and ignorant, but they are some students' opinions nonetheless.
  

  Now take a minute and read the free expression policy statement at the top of this editorial. It talks about how Penn State is an academic community where all alternative views should be heard and debated.
  

  If being part of an academic community's free search for truth is not "substantial," as the supreme court calls it, then we have no idea what is.